Skip to content

Conversation

millasml
Copy link
Contributor

Description

Please include a summary of the change and which issue is addressed. If this change resolves an issue, please include the issue number in the description.

Type of change

Please select one of the options below.

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
  • Documentation
  • Other

Discussion

Are there any design details that you would like to discuss further?

Testing

Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Unit tests?
Manual testing?

Do we need to perform additional testing once this is merged, or perform in a larger testing environment?

Documentation

Did you update relevant documentation within this repository?

If this change is adding new functionality, do we need to describe it in our user manual?

If this change is adding or removing subreconcilers, have we updated the core technical design doc to reflect that?

If this change is adding new safety checks or new potential failure modes, have we documented and how to debug potential issues?

Follow-up

Are there any follow-up issues that we should pursue in the future?

Does this introduce new defaults that we should re-evaluate in the future?

@millasml millasml marked this pull request as ready for review August 12, 2025 07:00
@millasml millasml force-pushed the millas/reconcile-backup-name branch from bf52919 to c47d696 Compare August 14, 2025 03:17
@@ -322,6 +322,11 @@ func (backup *FoundationDBBackup) CheckReconciliation() (bool, error) {
reconciled = false
}

if isRunning && backup.BackupURL() != backup.Status.BackupDetails.URL {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think it would be better to create a dedicated method (e.g. NeedsConfigurationChange) for this and combine the SnapshotPeriodSeconds and URL check. That way the method can be extended in the future without adding more if statements in CheckReconciliation.

@millasml millasml force-pushed the millas/reconcile-backup-name branch from c47d696 to b543387 Compare August 25, 2025 03:57
@millasml millasml requested a review from johscheuer August 25, 2025 08:30
@millasml
Copy link
Contributor Author

@johscheuer updated this!

Copy link
Member

@johscheuer johscheuer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

One comment, otherwise the changes look good. I guess testing this in the e2e tests will be hard as we only have a single blobstore.

Comment on lines +44 to +49
snapshotPeriod := backup.SnapshotPeriodSeconds()
backupURL := backup.BackupURL()

shouldModify := backup.Status.BackupDetails.SnapshotPeriodSeconds != snapshotPeriod ||
backup.Status.BackupDetails.URL != backupURL
if shouldModify {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
snapshotPeriod := backup.SnapshotPeriodSeconds()
backupURL := backup.BackupURL()
shouldModify := backup.Status.BackupDetails.SnapshotPeriodSeconds != snapshotPeriod ||
backup.Status.BackupDetails.URL != backupURL
if shouldModify {
if backup.NeedsBackupReconfiguration() {

Right now we are doing the same checks in NeedsBackupReconfiguration() , so is there a reason not to make use of it?

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