Skip to content

ARSN-656: default untyped batch operations to put in file metadata backend - #2730

Merged
bert-e merged 2 commits into
development/8.6from
bugfix/ARSN-656-file-batch-default-put
Oct 8, 2026
Merged

bert-e merged 2 commits into
development/8.6from
bugfix/ARSN-656-file-batch-default-put

Conversation

@francoisferrand

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Since 8.6.0-preview.4, the file metadata server goes through classic-level, and abstract-level rejects batch operations that have no type. level-sublevel used to treat them as puts, and the versioning layer still sends such operations for every non-versioned put. As a result, cloudserver with S3BACKEND=file crashes at startup:

"level":"fatal","message":"error writing usersBucket attributes to metadata"
error: "A batch operation must have a type property that is 'put' or 'del'"

This breaks every file-backend job in scality/cloudserver#6320 (CLDSRV-1013).

resolveBatchSubLevels now sets a missing type to put while it resolves the sublevel, so all callers of the server batch path work again. The PR also bumps the version to 8.6.0-preview.5.

Tested:

  • A new unit test fails without the fix and passes with it. The full unit suite passes.
  • Smoke-tested in cloudserver with S3BACKEND=file and this build: the server starts, and create bucket, put/get, and a versioned put all work.

Issue: ARSN-656

@bert-e

bert-e commented Oct 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Hello francoisferrand,

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 ⭐
/bypass_source_branch_lineage Bypass the cross-branch contamination check ⭐
/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.
/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.

@codecov

codecov Bot commented Oct 7, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 75.38%. Comparing base (5775eaa) to head (3ccf100).

Additional details and impacted files
@@               Coverage Diff                @@
##           development/8.6    #2730   +/-   ##
================================================
  Coverage            75.37%   75.38%           
================================================
  Files                  226      226           
  Lines                18633    18633           
  Branches              3894     3863   -31     
================================================
+ Hits                 14045    14046    +1     
+ Misses                4583     4582    -1     
  Partials                 5        5           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 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.

Since the file metadata server moved to classic-level, batches are checked
by abstract-level, which rejects operations without a type. level-sublevel
used to treat them as puts, and the versioning layer still emits such
operations, e.g. for any non-versioned put: cloudserver with the file
backend fails at startup when writing the users bucket.

Resolve the missing type to put along with the sublevel, so every batch
reaching the database is well-formed again.

Issue: ARSN-656
@francoisferrand
francoisferrand force-pushed the bugfix/ARSN-656-file-batch-default-put branch from 77c56c4 to 3ccf100 Compare October 7, 2026 21:19
@bert-e

bert-e commented Oct 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Waiting for approval

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

  • the author

  • 2 peers

@scality scality deleted a comment from bert-e Oct 7, 2026
@francoisferrand
francoisferrand marked this pull request as ready for review October 7, 2026 21:39
@francoisferrand

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

/approve

@bert-e

bert-e commented Oct 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

In the queue

The changeset has received all authorizations and has been added to the
relevant queue(s). The queue(s) will be merged in the target development
branch(es) as soon as builds have passed.

The changeset will be merged in:

  • ✔️ development/8.6

The following branches will NOT be impacted:

  • development/6.4
  • development/7.10
  • development/7.4
  • development/7.70
  • development/8.1
  • development/8.2
  • development/8.3
  • development/8.4
  • development/8.5

This pull request does not target the following hotfix branch(es) so they
will be left untouched:

  • hotfix/7.4.2
  • hotfix/7.4.3
  • hotfix/7.4.10
  • hotfix/7.10.46
  • hotfix/7.70.14
  • hotfix/7.7.0
  • hotfix/7.4.0
  • hotfix/6.4.7
  • hotfix/7.4.8
  • hotfix/7.8.0
  • hotfix/7.10.4
  • hotfix/7.10.31
  • hotfix/7.70.20
  • hotfix/7.4.7
  • hotfix/7.4.1
  • hotfix/7.9.0
  • hotfix/7.4.4
  • hotfix/7.70.25
  • hotfix/7.5.0
  • hotfix/7.10.57
  • hotfix/8.2.48
  • hotfix/7.70.4
  • hotfix/7.10.3
  • hotfix/7.4.9
  • hotfix/7.10.2
  • hotfix/7.10.47
  • hotfix/7.10.43
  • hotfix/7.10.0
  • hotfix/7.4.5
  • hotfix/7.6.0
  • hotfix/7.10.1
  • hotfix/7.4.6
  • hotfix/7.10.36
  • hotfix/7.2.0
  • hotfix/7.10.29

There is no action required on your side. You will be notified here once
the changeset has been merged. In the unlikely event that the changeset
fails permanently on the queue, a member of the admin team will
contact you to help resolve the matter.

IMPORTANT

Please do not attempt to modify this pull request.

  • Any commit you add on the source branch will trigger a new cycle after the
    current queue is merged.
  • Any commit you add on one of the integration branches will be lost.

If you need this pull request to be removed from the queue, please contact a
member of the admin team now.

The following options are set: approve

@bert-e

bert-e commented Oct 8, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

I have successfully merged the changeset of this pull request
into targetted development branches:

  • ✔️ development/8.6

The following branches have NOT changed:

  • development/6.4
  • development/7.10
  • development/7.4
  • development/7.70
  • development/8.1
  • development/8.2
  • development/8.3
  • development/8.4
  • development/8.5

Please check the status of the associated issue ARSN-656.

Goodbye francoisferrand.

@bert-e
bert-e merged commit e801521 into development/8.6 Oct 8, 2026
15 checks passed
@bert-e
bert-e deleted the bugfix/ARSN-656-file-batch-default-put branch October 8, 2026 08:58
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.

5 participants