storage: Use etcd lease to manage safe point expiration

[AmoebaProtozoa]

Signed-off-by: AmoebaProtozoa 8039876+AmoebaProtozoa@users.noreply.github.com

An enhancement to #4937 which manages expiration manually

What problem does this PR solve?

Use etcd Lease feature to manage service safe point life time
Add revision related storage functions
Issue Number: ref #4865
RFC: tikv/rfcs#90

What is changed and how does it work?

APIv2: Using ETCD Lease to manage service safe point expiration

Check List

Tests

• Unit test

Code changes

• Has configuration change
  No
• Has HTTP API interfaces changed (Don't forget to add the declarative for the new API)
  No
• Has persistent data change
  No

Side effects
No

Release note

None

[ti-chi-bot]

[REVIEW NOTIFICATION]

This pull request has not been approved.

To complete the pull request process, please ask the reviewers in the list to review by filling /cc @reviewer in the comment.
After your PR has acquired the required number of LGTMs, you can assign this pull request to the committer in the list by filling /assign @committer in the comment to help you merge this pull request.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Reviewer can indicate their review by submitting an approval review.
Reviewer can cancel approval by submitting a request changes review.

[AndreMouche]

Could we use etcdutil.EtcdKVPutWithTTL(context.TODO(),kv.client,key,value,ttlSeconds) directly?

[AmoebaProtozoa]

Hmm, I was trying to put SaveWithTTL into a SlowLogTxn like other update methods for timeout and logging. But I guess that created more complexity.

Should we skip timeout / logging for this operation like other read methods?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #4984 (bda31f4) into master (b100049) will decrease coverage by 0.25%.
The diff coverage is 52.08%.

❗ Current head bda31f4 differs from pull request most recent head ab98f7c. Consider uploading reports for the commit ab98f7c to get more accurate results

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #4984      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   75.65%   75.40%   -0.26%     
==========================================
  Files         310      309       -1     
  Lines       30675    30544     -131     
==========================================
- Hits        23208    23032     -176     
- Misses       5463     5495      +32     
- Partials     2004     2017      +13     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	75.40% <52.08%> (-0.26%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
server/storage/kv/etcd_kv.go	69.56% <46.42%> (-10.15%)	⬇️
server/storage/endpoint/gc_key_space.go	68.83% <57.89%> (+2.16%)	⬆️
server/storage/endpoint/key_path.go	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
pkg/errs/errs.go	75.00% <0.00%> (-25.00%)	⬇️
server/config/service_middleware_config.go	75.00% <0.00%> (-25.00%)	⬇️
server/api/service_middleware.go	68.18% <0.00%> (-16.64%)	⬇️
server/api/admin.go	50.87% <0.00%> (-16.57%)	⬇️
server/storage/endpoint/rule.go	83.33% <0.00%> (-11.12%)	⬇️
pkg/tempurl/tempurl.go	60.00% <0.00%> (-10.00%)	⬇️
server/gc/safepoint.go	84.61% <0.00%> (-7.98%)	⬇️
... and 42 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update b100049...ab98f7c. Read the comment docs.

[JmPotato]

revision here is a very specific term that is related to etcd, is there a better way to avoid introducing it in this generic KV interface?

[ti-chi-bot]

@AmoebaProtozoa: PR needs rebase.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.