[SERVER-36815] Remove the references of hash field of oplog entry Created: 23/Aug/18 Updated: 29/Oct/23 Resolved: 17/Jan/19 |
|
| Status: | Closed |
| Project: | Core Server |
| Component/s: | Replication |
| Affects Version/s: | None |
| Fix Version/s: | 4.1.8 |
| Type: | Bug | Priority: | Major - P3 |
| Reporter: | Siyuan Zhou | Assignee: | Samyukta Lanka |
| Resolution: | Fixed | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | neweng | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Issue Links: |
|
||||||||
| Backwards Compatibility: | Fully Compatible | ||||||||
| Operating System: | ALL | ||||||||
| Sprint: | Repl 2019-01-28 | ||||||||
| Participants: | |||||||||
| Description |
|
In PV1, hash is a random number and unnecessary, so we can remove its all references, including OpTimeWithHash used by OplogFetcher and OplogSlot. |
| Comments |
| Comment by Siyuan Zhou [ 14/Feb/19 ] |
|
Alternatively, we can make OplogEntryBase not strict about unknown fields in 4.4. |
| Comment by Siyuan Zhou [ 12/Feb/19 ] |
|
Shall we gate writing hash with FCV 4.0 then? If 4.2 still write it, 4.4 will see it and have to accept it for FCV 4.2 so that we cannot remove the optional field, right? |
| Comment by Samyukta Lanka [ 12/Feb/19 ] |
|
siyuan.zhou, yes this was because without writing the hash in the oplog it was failing multiversion tests. For now it is optional though, I'm not sure we can remove it altogether yet because of multiversion compatibility. I think we agree that we'd remove it as a part of |
| Comment by Siyuan Zhou [ 12/Feb/19 ] |
|
samy.lanka, it seems we still write hash in oplog, is there any particular reason we left it alone? To be able to remove hash from the IDL in 4.4, we should stop writing hash into oplog in 4.2. |
| Comment by Githook User [ 17/Jan/19 ] |
|
Author: {'username': 'lankas', 'email': 'samy.lanka@mongodb.com', 'name': 'Samy Lanka'}Message: |
| Comment by Judah Schvimer [ 08/Oct/18 ] |
|
This should include making the "h" field optional in the IDL. |
| Comment by Siyuan Zhou [ 23/Aug/18 ] |
|
I think they are different, |
| Comment by Judah Schvimer [ 23/Aug/18 ] |
|
siyuan.zhou, is this a duplicate of |