-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 413
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
upgrade aws-sdk #4918
upgrade aws-sdk #4918
Conversation
AMAZING |
AMAZING++ |
no wayyyyyyyyyy! |
StorageErrorKind::Internal | ||
.with_error(anyhow!("failed to build object identifier")), | ||
); | ||
unattempted.extend(chunk.iter().map(|path| path.to_path_buf())); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
that code logic is not good:
we batch things in chunk... If one of the object is wrong in the chunk we ditch the entire chunk, but not the entire request, even though at this point not request happened.
This does not make much sense. Chunking should happen after creating the object identifier.
The code woudl be simpler and the spec would make way more sense.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Awesome job. Please see comments
@@ -643,7 +675,7 @@ impl S3CompatibleObjectStorage { | |||
} | |||
Err(delete_objects_error) => { | |||
error = Some(delete_objects_error.into()); | |||
unattempted.extend(chunk.iter().map(|path| path.to_path_buf())); | |||
unattempted.extend(chunk.iter().map(|(path, _oid)| path.to_path_buf())); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is technically incorrect. These path have been attempted.
For instance, at this point, they might be deleted.
I did not include this PR in the 0501 airmail test to avoid risk, but we can try that next time. |
Description
fix #4822
How was this PR tested?
updated unit tests