Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Added structs for replication diag #330

Draft
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

shtripat
Copy link
Contributor

@shtripat shtripat commented Feb 5, 2025

No description provided.

@shtripat shtripat force-pushed the replication-diag branch 2 times, most recently from 6b958dc to 36857be Compare February 6, 2025 11:20
Signed-off-by: Shubhendu Ram Tripathi <[email protected]>
@harshavardhana harshavardhana changed the title [DON'T MERGE] Added structs for replication diag Added structs for replication diag Feb 10, 2025
Signed-off-by: Shubhendu Ram Tripathi <[email protected]>
ActiveWorkers WorkerStat `json:"active_workers,omitempty"`
Queued InQueueMetric `json:"queued,omitempty"`
ReplicaCount int64 `json:"replica_count,omitempty"`
ReplicaSize int64 `json:"replica_size,omitempty"`

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What do ReplicaCount and ReplicaSize represent?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ReplicaCount = no of objects replicated
ReplicaSize = no of bytes replicated

IIUC

Edge bool `json:"edge,omitempty"`
ILMEnabled bool `json:"ilm_enabled,omitempty"`
EncryptionEnabled bool `json:"encryption_enabled,omitempty"`
ILMExpiryReplication bool `json:"ilm_expiry_replication,omitempty"`
Copy link

@dhananjaykrutika dhananjaykrutika Feb 13, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Shouldn't lines 46-54 be captured per node, perhaps in MinIONode below, the intention being, to flag any mismatch across nodes in the subsequent reporting step?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

My thought was that across sites if they mismatch, that itself is issue

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants