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

[3.5] clientv3: fix the implementation of double barrier #14658

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 2, 2022

Conversation

ahrtr
Copy link
Member

@ahrtr ahrtr commented Oct 31, 2022

Cherry-pick #14604 to 3.5

Signed-off-by: Benjamin Wang wachao@vmware.com

cc @mitake @ptabor @spzala @serathius

@ahrtr ahrtr changed the title clientv3: fix the design & implementation of double barrier [3.5] clientv3: fix the design & implementation of double barrier Oct 31, 2022
Check the client count before creating the ephemeral key, do not
create the key if there are already too many clients. Check the
count after creating the key again, if the total kvs is bigger
than the expected count, then check the rev of the current key,
and take action accordingly based on its rev. If its rev is in
the first ${count}, then it's valid client, otherwise, it should
fail.

Signed-off-by: Benjamin Wang <wachao@vmware.com>
@ahrtr ahrtr force-pushed the double_barrier_3.5 branch from e442d87 to 8e26a1f Compare October 31, 2022 00:33
@ahrtr ahrtr changed the title [3.5] clientv3: fix the design & implementation of double barrier [3.5] clientv3: fix the implementation of double barrier Oct 31, 2022
@ahrtr
Copy link
Member Author

ahrtr commented Nov 2, 2022

@spzala @serathius @mitake @ptabor PTAL, thx

@mitake
Copy link
Contributor

mitake commented Nov 2, 2022

LGTM, thanks @ahrtr

@mitake mitake merged commit cc6a082 into etcd-io:release-3.5 Nov 2, 2022
@ahrtr
Copy link
Member Author

ahrtr commented Nov 2, 2022

Thanks @mitake

Since this PR has been merged, could you approve and merge the related changelog PR? #14659

@serathius serathius mentioned this pull request Nov 14, 2022
22 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants