[SERVER-73382] Investigate change stream behaviour in cases where documents do not have an '_id' Created: 27/Jan/23 Updated: 06/Feb/23 |
|
| Status: | Backlog |
| Project: | Core Server |
| Component/s: | None |
| Affects Version/s: | None |
| Fix Version/s: | None |
| Type: | Improvement | Priority: | Major - P3 |
| Reporter: | Mohammad Dashti (Inactive) | Assignee: | Backlog - Query Execution |
| Resolution: | Unresolved | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | None | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Issue Links: |
|
||||||||
| Assigned Teams: |
Query Execution
|
||||||||
| Participants: | |||||||||
| Description |
|
Currently, there are some tests (e.g., this one: "legacy documents might not have an _id field"? This is over 5 years old, from the initial implementation of change streams in 3.6. It does not seem to be relevant anymore, and there are a couple of places (e.g. updateLookup) where change streams rely on having an _id to work correctly. As part of this ticket, we want to investigate whether there are any remaining cases where change streams may see a document without an _id, and how it behaves in those scenarios. |