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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

release-22.2: kvserver: make consistency check symmetrical #88339

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 21, 2022
Merged

release-22.2: kvserver: make consistency check symmetrical #88339

merged 1 commit into from
Sep 21, 2022

Conversation

blathers-crl[bot]
Copy link

@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot commented Sep 21, 2022

Backport 1/1 commits from #88268 on behalf of @pavelkalinnikov.

/cc @cockroachdb/release

Previously, a consistency check would fail if the local replica failed to compute the checksum. This makes the consistency checks not resilient to issues with the leader.

The only place depending on this assertion is the MVCC stats delta sub-check of the consistency check. It is not strictly required to take delta from the local replica for this purpose, any successful response from other replicas can be used too.

This commit makes it so that any successful checksum computation can be examined. As a result, all replicas are treated symmetrically, so the consistency check is more resilient to leader issues.

Touches #77432
Release note: None

Release justification:

@pav-kv
kvserver: make consistency check symmetrical
34236f0 
Previously, a consistency check would fail if the local replica failed to
compute the checksum. This makes the consistency checks not resilient to issues
with the leader.

The only place depending on this assertion is the MVCC stats delta sub-check of
the consistency check. It is not strictly required to take delta from the local
replica for this purpose, any successful response from other replicas can be
used too.

This commit makes it so that any successful checksum computation can be
examined. As a result, all replicas are treated symmetrically, so the
consistency check is more resilient to leader issues.

Release note: None
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot requested a review from a team as a code owner September 21, 2022 12:50
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot force-pushed the blathers/backport-release-22.2-88268 branch from 79f206d to 34236f0 Compare September 21, 2022 12:50
@blathers-crl
Copy link
Author

blathers-crl bot commented Sep 21, 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?

@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot requested review from erikgrinaker and tbg September 21, 2022 12:50
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot added blathers-backport This is a backport that Blathers created automatically. O-robot Originated from a bot. labels Sep 21, 2022
@cockroach-teamcity
Copy link
Member

This change is Reviewable

erikgrinaker
erikgrinaker approved these changes Sep 21, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@erikgrinaker erikgrinaker left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, but needs approval in #release-backports.

@pav-kv pav-kv merged commit 6145122 into release-22.2 Sep 21, 2022
@pav-kv pav-kv deleted the blathers/backport-release-22.2-88268 branch September 21, 2022 18:43
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@erikgrinaker erikgrinaker erikgrinaker approved these changes

@tbg tbg Awaiting requested review from tbg

Assignees

@pav-kv pav-kv

Labels
blathers-backport This is a backport that Blathers created automatically. O-robot Originated from a bot.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@cockroach-teamcity @erikgrinaker @pav-kv