[SERVER-33638] CheckReplDBHash should ignore mapreduce incremental collections Created: 02/Mar/18  Updated: 29/Oct/23  Resolved: 06/Apr/18

Status: Closed
Project: Core Server
Component/s: Replication
Affects Version/s: None
Fix Version/s: 3.6.6, 3.7.4

Type: Bug Priority: Major - P3
Reporter: Matthew Russotto Assignee: Samyukta Lanka
Resolution: Fixed Votes: 0
Labels: None
Remaining Estimate: Not Specified
Time Spent: Not Specified
Original Estimate: Not Specified

Issue Links:
Backports
Depends
Related
is related to SERVER-27147 Do not initial sync data written with... Closed
Backwards Compatibility: Fully Compatible
Operating System: ALL
Backport Requested:
v3.6
Sprint: TIG 2018-04-09, TIG 2018-04-23
Participants:
Linked BF Score: 16

 Description   

If a mapreduce is interrupted by a stepdown while its "_inc" collection exists, it will not be able to delete the "_inc" collection. Since that collection is not replicated (per SERVER-13981), this will result in a DBHash mismatch.

It might be better to come up with a better way of handling those collections, such as putting them in local.tmp. As it is I wonder if initial-syncing nodes will pick up the _inc collections even though they are not in the oplog.



 Comments   
Comment by Githook User [ 20/Jun/18 ]

Author:

{'username': 'lankas', 'name': 'Samy Lanka', 'email': 'samy.lanka@gmail.com'}

Message: SERVER-33638 CheckReplDBHash should ignore mapreduce incremental collections

(cherry picked from commit cfca03043ea22351b9080b062ca35a021dc06bc2)
Branch: v3.6
https://github.com/mongodb/mongo/commit/ba96083d4298be9d19611fbd3d43c74bcf85bcd9

Comment by Githook User [ 06/Apr/18 ]

Author:

{'email': 'samy.lanka@gmail.com', 'name': 'Samy Lanka', 'username': 'lankas'}

Message: SERVER-33638 CheckReplDBHash should ignore mapreduce incremental collections
Branch: master
https://github.com/mongodb/mongo/commit/cfca03043ea22351b9080b062ca35a021dc06bc2

Comment by Matthew Russotto [ 08/Mar/18 ]

That's the already-existing SERVER-27147. It's in backlog unfortunately.

Comment by Kevin Duong [ 08/Mar/18 ]

matthew.russotto Have you filed a separate Server ticket for the local.temp solution?

Comment by Matthew Russotto [ 02/Mar/18 ]

Looks like it does indeed try to initial-sync these. SERVER-27147 covers that.

Generated at Thu Feb 08 04:34:05 UTC 2024 using Jira 9.7.1#970001-sha1:2222b88b221c4928ef0de3161136cc90c8356a66.