Loading...

XML

Word

Printable

JSON

Type: Task
Resolution: Unresolved
Priority: Major - P3
Fix Version/s: None
Affects Version/s: None
Component/s: None
Labels:
- repl-shortlist

Assigned Teams:

Replication
Confidence Status:
None
Work Order:
3
CAR Domain/s:
None

Aha! Reference:
None
Tracking Level:
None
Risk Status:
None
Exec Notes:
None
Goal Name(s):
None
Goal Link:
None

The `shouldBeFCVGated` parameter was added as part of ~~SERVER-68151~~.

However, developers may not be aware that marking `shouldBeFCVGated: false` can be unsafe, and this flag does not necessarily convey this lack of safety the same way that isEnabledAndIgnoreFCVUnsafe does.

We should consider whether this parameter should be changed or removed to be safer.

is depended on by

SERVER-84305 Update isDisabledOnTargetFCVButEnabledOnOriginalFCV and isEnabledOnTargetFCVButDisabledOnOriginalFCV to take shouldBeFCVGated into account

Blocked

is related to

SERVER-77787 featureFlagDeprioritizeLowPriorityOperations is shouldBeFCVGated: true

Closed

related to

SERVER-85569 Add more examples to shouldBeFCVGated documentation

Closed

SERVER-99281 Use separate types for FCV-gated vs. non-FCV-gated feature flags

Closed

SERVER-99285 Introduce separate C++ classes for FCV-gated and non-FCV-gated feature flags

Closed

SERVER-99302 Refactor binary-compatible feature flags into a standalone API

Closed

(1 related to)

Assignee:: [DO NOT USE] Backlog - Replication Team
Reporter:: Huayu Ouyang
Participants:: [DO NOT USE] Backlog - Replication Team, Andy Schwerin, Huayu Ouyang, Max Hirschhorn
Votes:: 0 Vote for this issue
Watchers:: 13 Start watching this issue

Created:: Jun 06 2023 03:48:39 PM UTC
Updated:: Feb 06 2025 07:33:27 PM UTC

Details

Description

Attachments

Issue Links

Forms

Activity

People

Dates