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-21.2: [CRDB-3303] ui: handle latency not defined on network page #78627

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 28, 2022

Conversation

blathers-crl[bot]
Copy link

@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot commented Mar 28, 2022

Backport 1/1 commits from #78292 on behalf of @Santamaura.

/cc @cockroachdb/release


Previously when a cluster with multiple nodes had a node stopped
and then another node quickly started, the network page would crash.
This was due to the node object holding the latency value being
undefined and the ui trying to read this key when that was undefined.
This occurs when a node is in an UNAVAILABLE state.
This patch resolves the issue by being more defensive on the front
end by safely attempting to access latency and if it is undefined,
set the value to 0. The existing code is able to handle this case
afterward and will eventually set the user friendly latency status
to --.
Resolves: #59322

Release note (ui change): Fixes a bug where a node in the
UNAVAILABLE state will not have latency defined and cause the
network page to crash.

Overview list page & network page when node status is UNAVAILABLE:

Screen Shot 2022-03-22 at 5 14 47 PM

Screen Shot 2022-03-22 at 5 14 59 PM


Release justification: 1 Line change for very useful bug fix

Previously when a cluster with multiple nodes had a node stopped
and then another node quickly started, the network page would crash.
This was due to the node object holding the latency value being
undefined and the ui trying to read this key when that was undefined.
This occurs when a node is in an `UNAVAILABLE` state.
This patch resolves the issue by being more defensive on the front
end by safely attempting to access latency and if it is undefined,
set the value to 0. The existing code is able to handle this case
afterward and will eventually set the user friendly latency status
to `--`.
Resolves: #59322

Release note (ui change): Fixes a bug where a node in the
`UNAVAILABLE` state will not have latency defined and cause the
network page to crash.
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot force-pushed the blathers/backport-release-21.2-78292 branch from 884bb19 to bac6474 Compare March 28, 2022 15:24
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot requested review from koorosh and zachlite March 28, 2022 15:24
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot added blathers-backport This is a backport that Blathers created automatically. O-robot Originated from a bot. labels Mar 28, 2022
@blathers-crl
Copy link
Author

blathers-crl bot commented Mar 28, 2022

Thanks for opening a backport.

Please check the backport criteria before merging:

  • Patches should only be created for serious issues or test-only changes.
  • 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.
  • Patches must not add, edit, or otherwise modify cluster versions; or add version gates.
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

Copy link
Contributor

@zachlite zachlite left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Reviewed 1 of 1 files at r1, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: :shipit: complete! 0 of 0 LGTMs obtained (waiting on @koorosh)

@Santamaura Santamaura merged commit a879d3e into release-21.2 Mar 28, 2022
@Santamaura Santamaura deleted the blathers/backport-release-21.2-78292 branch March 28, 2022 18:20
@Santamaura Santamaura restored the blathers/backport-release-21.2-78292 branch March 28, 2022 18:20
@Santamaura Santamaura deleted the blathers/backport-release-21.2-78292 branch March 28, 2022 18:20
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
blathers-backport This is a backport that Blathers created automatically. O-robot Originated from a bot.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants