Check large objects before replication

[KillianG]

Issue: BB-566

[bert-e]

Hello killiang,

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.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 81.48148% with 5 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 69.77%. Comparing base (31d9ca6) to head (e4f5d49).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
extensions/replication/tasks/ReplicateObject.js	81.48%	5 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...tensions/replication/ReplicationConfigValidator.js	60.00% <ø> (ø)
extensions/replication/tasks/ReplicateObject.js	91.49% <81.48%> (-0.87%)	⬇️

... and 6 files with indirect coverage changes

Components	Coverage Δ
Bucket Notification	66.66% <ø> (ø)
Core Library	74.12% <ø> (-0.02%)	⬇️
Ingestion	69.24% <ø> (ø)
Lifecycle	75.83% <ø> (ø)
Oplog Populator	82.95% <ø> (ø)
Replication	57.67% <81.48%> (+0.25%)	⬆️
Bucket Scanner	85.60% <ø> (-0.16%)	⬇️

@@                 Coverage Diff                 @@
##           development/8.7    #2558      +/-   ##
===================================================
+ Coverage            69.67%   69.77%   +0.10%     
===================================================
  Files                  194      194              
  Lines                12819    12919     +100     
===================================================
+ Hits                  8931     9014      +83     
- Misses                3878     3895      +17     
  Partials                10       10              

Flag	Coverage Δ
api:retry	9.61% <0.00%> (-0.03%)	⬇️
api:routes	9.51% <0.00%> (-0.03%)	⬇️
bucket-scanner	85.60% <ø> (-0.16%)	⬇️
unit	44.50% <7.40%> (-0.09%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

[bert-e]

Waiting for approval

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

• the author

• 2 peers

[francoisferrand]

May be a good occasion to review this option:

• can we find a better name (maxObjectSize ?)
• this option is weird, as it breaks crr semantics: what is the purpose of this option? Is it really used? Is there a matching option in cloudserver?

[KillianG]

AFAIK, This option simply adds a double check before repushing the object to replication, if an object is so large it takes time to replicate to avoid sending multiple times the same object for replication

We can probably find a better name for it though..
Why do you think it breaks crr sementic ? I don't know if it's really used but there is a default value so I guess it is no ?

[francoisferrand]

Should have tests verifying that "large" objects are not replicated...