[SERVER-78877] Why do 'find' and 'aggregate' commands represent maxTimeMS differently? Created: 11/Jul/23 Updated: 10/Nov/23 Resolved: 10/Nov/23 |
|
| Status: | Closed |
| Project: | Core Server |
| Component/s: | None |
| Affects Version/s: | None |
| Fix Version/s: | 7.3.0-rc0 |
| Type: | Improvement | Priority: | Major - P3 |
| Reporter: | David Percy | Assignee: | James Harrison |
| Resolution: | Fixed | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | neweng | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Issue Links: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| Assigned Teams: |
Query Optimization
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| Backwards Compatibility: | Fully Compatible | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Sprint: | QO 2023-10-02, QO 2023-10-16, QO 2023-10-30, QO 2023-11-13 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Participants: | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Description |
|
Currently FindCommandRequest and AggregateCommandRequest represent maxTimeMS differently:
Not only is the C++ type different, but also the BSON type and the parsing/validation rules are different. For simplicity, can we make them the same? Especially since we translate 'find' requests to 'aggregate' (for views), you would think they have the same set of valid values. Looks like the last ticket to touch this was |
| Comments |
| Comment by Githook User [ 19/Oct/23 ] |
|
Author: {'name': 'James Harrison', 'email': '00jamesh@gmail.com', 'username': 'jameseh96'}Message: |
| Comment by James Wahlin [ 25/Sep/23 ] |
|
I don't know of a reason not to support a 64 bit integer across the board. We wouldn't consider this a breaking API change as no one should be relying on > int_32t values returning an error. |
| Comment by James Harrison [ 25/Sep/23 ] |
|
james.wahlin@mongodb.com What are your thoughts on this? I'm not sure if applying the proposed change to maxTimeMS for count would count as a breaking change to the API, or if there's a specific reason it was required to be int32_t before. |