Repository navigation
Conversation
F64116045
changed the title
priyeshkaratha
approved these changes
Oct 30, 2026
priyeshkaratha
left a comment
priyeshkaratha
left a comment
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks @F64116045 for working on this. Changes LGTM
Contributor
Author
|
hi @priyeshkaratha thanks for the review! CI caught an issue with reading the saved configuration, so I moved the flush after the index update. |
F64116045
marked this pull request as ready for review
October 31, 2026 09:11
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
saveConfiguration()runs during Ratis transaction apply, before the transaction index is updated. Its directflush()can persist data with the previous index, causing an already-persisted transaction to be replayed after a crash.This PR uses
flushIfNeeded(0)to defer the flush while apply is in progress. This keeps the data and transaction index consistent and avoids incorrect results from this replay if non-idempotent operations are introduced in the future.This fixes a similar issue to #11837 in
StatefulServiceStateManagerImpl.What is the link to the Apache JIRA?
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-16453
How was this patch tested?
Added a regression test that calls
saveConfiguration()during apply and verifies that the configuration stays buffered until it can be flushed with the updated transaction index.CI: https://github.com/F64116045/ozone/actions/runs/41179847269