Skip to content

Fix ETag fallback to dataStoreETag for ring-s3-rdma-http objects#2622

Open
borisfaure wants to merge 1 commit intodevelopment/8.4from
improvement/ARSN-579-mpu-etag-no-content-md5
Open

Fix ETag fallback to dataStoreETag for ring-s3-rdma-http objects#2622
borisfaure wants to merge 1 commit intodevelopment/8.4from
improvement/ARSN-579-mpu-etag-no-content-md5

Conversation

@borisfaure
Copy link
Copy Markdown

When content-md5 is absent (e.g. parts written by ring-s3-rdma-http which stores ETag only as "1:" in dataStoreETag), fall back to extracting the hex portion from dataStoreETag for use as the ETag in list entries.

Issue: ARSN-579

When content-md5 is absent (e.g. parts written by ring-s3-rdma-http
which stores ETag only as "1:<hex>" in dataStoreETag), fall back to
extracting the hex portion from dataStoreETag for use as the ETag in
list entries.

Issue: ARSN-579
@bert-e
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

bert-e commented Apr 24, 2026

Hello borisfaure,

My role is to assist you with the merge of this
pull request. Please type @bert-e help to get information
on this process, or consult the user documentation.

Available options
name description privileged authored
/after_pull_request Wait for the given pull request id to be merged before continuing with the current one.
/bypass_author_approval Bypass the pull request author's approval
/bypass_build_status Bypass the build and test status
/bypass_commit_size Bypass the check on the size of the changeset TBA
/bypass_incompatible_branch Bypass the check on the source branch prefix
/bypass_jira_check Bypass the Jira issue check
/bypass_peer_approval Bypass the pull request peers' approval
/bypass_leader_approval Bypass the pull request leaders' approval
/approve Instruct Bert-E that the author has approved the pull request. ✍️
/create_pull_requests Allow the creation of integration pull requests.
/create_integration_branches Allow the creation of integration branches.
/no_octopus Prevent Wall-E from doing any octopus merge and use multiple consecutive merge instead
/unanimity Change review acceptance criteria from one reviewer at least to all reviewers
/wait Instruct Bert-E not to run until further notice.
Available commands
name description privileged
/help Print Bert-E's manual in the pull request.
/status Print Bert-E's current status in the pull request TBA
/clear Remove all comments from Bert-E from the history TBA
/retry Re-start a fresh build TBA
/build Re-start a fresh build TBA
/force_reset Delete integration branches & pull requests, and restart merge process from the beginning.
/reset Try to remove integration branches unless there are commits on them which do not appear on the source branch.

Status report is not available.

@scality scality deleted a comment from bert-e Apr 24, 2026
@bert-e
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

bert-e commented Apr 24, 2026

Waiting for approval

The following approvals are needed before I can proceed with the merge:

  • the author

  • 2 peers

if (colon !== -1) {
etag = dst.slice(colon + 1);
}
}
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No tests cover _parseListEntries today, and this adds non-trivial branching (array vs single location, colon parsing). Consider adding a unit test that exercises at least: (1) content-md5 present (existing behavior), (2) content-md5 absent with partLocations array containing a dataStoreETag like "1:abc123", (3) content-md5 absent with no partLocations.

— Claude Code

@claude
Copy link
Copy Markdown

claude Bot commented Apr 24, 2026

The ETag fallback logic is correct and handles edge cases well (undefined partLocations, empty array, missing colon). One concern:

- No test coverage for _parseListEntries, including the new fallback branches
- Add unit tests covering: content-md5 present, content-md5 absent with dataStoreETag fallback, and content-md5 absent with no partLocations

Review by Claude Code

@codecov
Copy link
Copy Markdown

codecov Bot commented Apr 24, 2026

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 60.00000% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 73.47%. Comparing base (06da567) to head (c9953a2).

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
lib/storage/metadata/MetadataWrapper.js 60.00% 4 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@                 Coverage Diff                 @@
##           development/8.4    #2622      +/-   ##
===================================================
- Coverage            73.48%   73.47%   -0.01%     
===================================================
  Files                  222      222              
  Lines                18183    18193      +10     
  Branches              3787     3769      -18     
===================================================
+ Hits                 13361    13367       +6     
- Misses                4817     4821       +4     
  Partials                 5        5              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@francoisferrand
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

francoisferrand commented Apr 24, 2026

Falling back to datastore ETag seems very risky, as ETag may thus change: for exemple in case of transition (or other obscure features: transient locations...) to another storage location.
→ ETag should be written by Cloudserver when creating the object.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants