Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

release-21.1: kv/kvserver/rangefeed: fix catchupIter construction synchronization #69625

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 25, 2021

Conversation

blathers-crl[bot]
Copy link

@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot commented Aug 31, 2021

Backport 2/2 commits from #69613 on behalf of @ajwerner.

/cc @cockroachdb/release


The catchupIter could have been constructed after the state of the underlying
store has changed. In general this doesn't seem like a disaster unless the
range has been removed or the gc threshold has changed and data is gone.

So, maybe it is a disaster.

Release justification: fixes for high-priority or high-severity bugs in
existing functionality

Release note: None


Release justification:

The catchupIter could have been constructed after the state of the underlying
store has changed. In general this doesn't seem like a disaster unless the
range has been removed or the gc threshold has changed and data is gone.

So, maybe it is a disaster.

Release justification: fixes for high-priority or high-severity bugs in
existing functionality

Release note: None
Release justification: non-production code change

Release note: None
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot requested a review from a team as a code owner August 31, 2021 06:59
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot force-pushed the blathers/backport-release-21.1-69613 branch from 62a814f to d44170f Compare August 31, 2021 06:59
@blathers-crl
Copy link
Author

blathers-crl bot commented Aug 31, 2021

Thanks for opening a backport.

Please check the backport criteria before merging:

  • Patches should only be created for serious issues.
  • Patches should not break backwards-compatibility.
  • Patches should change as little code as possible.
  • Patches should not change on-disk formats or node communication protocols.
  • Patches should not add new functionality.
If some of the basic criteria cannot be satisfied, ensure that the exceptional criteria are satisfied within.
  • There is a high priority need for the functionality that cannot wait until the next release and is difficult to address in another way.
  • The new functionality is additive-only and only runs for clusters which have specifically “opted in” to it (e.g. by a cluster setting).
  • New code is protected by a conditional check that is trivial to verify and ensures that it only runs for opt-in clusters.
  • The PM and TL on the team that owns the changed code have signed off that the change obeys the above rules.

Add a brief release justification to the body of your PR to justify this backport.

Some other things to consider:

  • What did we do to ensure that a user that doesn’t know & care about this backport, has no idea that it happened?
  • Will this work in a cluster of mixed patch versions? Did we test that?
  • If a user upgrades a patch version, uses this feature, and then downgrades, what happens?

@cockroach-teamcity
Copy link
Member

This change is Reviewable

@stevendanna
Copy link
Collaborator

Is this still something we want? I think we are probably good on the baking period now.

@ajwerner
Copy link
Contributor

I think yes. Will push the button.

@ajwerner ajwerner merged commit 6d22af9 into release-21.1 Oct 25, 2021
@ajwerner ajwerner deleted the blathers/backport-release-21.1-69613 branch October 25, 2021 14:50
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.

4 participants