deardeng opened a new pull request, #70494:
URL: https://github.com/apache/doris/pull/70494

   ### Background
   
   Cloud management operations can be registered as protobuf RPCs and as HTTP 
routes. The authenticated Recycler HTTP route is used to enqueue instances for 
recycling.
   
   ### What problem does this PR solve?
   
   Issue Number: None
   Related PR: None
   PR Type: Bugfix
   
   Problem Summary: Remove unused cloud management endpoints while preserving 
the HTTP workflow for recycling instances and read compatibility for existing 
IAM data.
   
   ### Details
   
   - **Frequency:** Applies to direct RPC calls for the two retired methods and 
HTTP calls for the retired IAM update route.
   - **Root cause:** Legacy service registrations kept unused management 
methods exposed.
   - **Why existing tests missed it:** Existing tests exercised these handlers 
as available APIs. They did not check which transport exposed each operation.
   - **Fix:** Remove the Recycler recycle_instance RPC and keep its HTTP 
handler. Remove the MetaService alter_iam RPC and HTTP route, their 
implementation, request and response messages, and operation metrics.
   - **Other paths and branches:** Keep the original Recycler queue path, 
existing IAM reads, and instance-level RAM user updates. Remaining protobuf 
field IDs and types are unchanged.
   - **Behavior change:** The retired endpoints are unavailable on upgraded 
servers.
   
   ### Testing
   
   - Built the Cloud ASAN unit tests on the development host.
   - Passed all 33 MetaServiceHttpTest cases, including the retired endpoint 
and RAM user update checks.
   - Passed MetaServiceTest.GetIamTest, MetaServiceTest.AlterRamTest, and 
RecyclerServiceTest.skip_instance_data_cleanup.
   - Verified the protobuf descriptors and checked changed C++ files with 
clang-format 16.
   - Checked the updated Recycler handler and new HTTP regression test with 
clang-tidy.
   
   ### Release note
   
   The Recycler recycle_instance operation remains available through its 
authenticated HTTP route. Its direct RPC and the MetaService alter_iam 
endpoints are retired.
   
   ### Check List (For Author)
   
   - Behavior changed: Yes (see Details)
   - Does this need documentation: No
   - Pre-submission status: Partially verified: Cloud ASAN unit tests passed. 
Product integration was not run.
   
   ### AI Disclosure
   
   - Tool: Codex
   - Generated: Code, tests, and commit message.
   - Human review: Pending.
   
   ### Background
   
   <!-- How the feature or module this PR touches works today, in two to four 
plain sentences, for a reviewer who doesn't know it. Link the user doc if there 
is one. Leave the problem and the fix to Problem Summary. -->
   
   ### What problem does this PR solve?
   
   <!-- Issue Number: "close #N" if this PR resolves the issue, "#N" if it only 
relates to it, "None" if there is none. A Feature needs an issue. -->
   <!-- Related PR: "#N (relation)" for each PR a reviewer should know about, 
such as "#123 (introduced the bug)", separated by commas. Write "None" if no 
related PR is known. -->
   <!-- PR Type: Bugfix, Performance, Feature, Enhancement, Refactor, Test, 
Build/CI/Chore, Revert, Release/Dependency, or Other. -->
   
   Issue Number:
   Related PR:
   PR Type:
   
   Problem Summary:
   
   <!-- Two to five sentences: the problem or need and who is affected; the 
approach in one sentence; when the diff is larger than that suggests, what else 
it had to handle, or that most of it is tests; and what existing users see 
after an upgrade. -->
   
   ### Details
   
   <!--
   For a diff of more than about 300 changed lines, start with "- **Change 
map:**": how many lines are production code, tests, generated files, and docs, 
then the code in parts, each with the problem it handles and its size.
   Then answer each field of your PR type on its own line, as "- **Field:** 
answer", in this order:
     Bugfix: Frequency, Root cause, Why existing tests missed it, Fix, Other 
paths and branches
     Performance: Why it was slow, Optimization, Results, Applicability and cost
     Feature: Scope, Design, Usage, Default behavior, Compatibility
     Enhancement: Before and after, Configs and defaults, Impact on existing 
users
     Refactor: Moves vs. logic changes, Behavior change, Compatibility, 
Performance impact, Rollback
     Test, adding tests: Scenarios, What existing tests miss, Fails when broken
     Test, fixing a test: Failure, Cause, Stability evidence
     Build/CI/Chore: Affected, Developer and release impact, License and 
third-party, Rollback
     Revert: Why not fix forward, Original author notified, Follow-up
     Release/Dependency: Versions, Upstream changes, Compatibility, Rollback
     Other: Why Other
   "None" is a valid answer when it is true. Don't restate the diff.
   -->
   
   ### Testing
   
   <!-- The tests, suites, or commands that ran, what each shows, and where it 
ran (locally or in CI). For a fix, the test that fails before it and passes 
after. -->
   
   ### Notes for Reviewers
   
   <!-- Optional; delete this section if there is nothing to say. Why each 
non-obvious edit was made, what you are unsure about, and where to start 
reading if Details has no Change map. -->
   
   ### Release note
   
   <!-- One paragraph on what users will notice, or None. -->
   
   ### Check List (For Author)
   
   <!-- Behavior changed: "No", or "Yes (see Details)" with a Behavior change 
field in Details. -->
   <!-- Does this need documentation: "No", or "Yes" with the 
apache/doris-website PR or the plan. -->
   <!-- Pre-submission status: "Ready"; "Partially verified: " and what is not 
verified; or "Not ready: " and why, for a Draft PR. -->
   
   - Behavior changed:
   - Does this need documentation:
   - Pre-submission status:
   
   ### AI Disclosure
   
   <!-- Tool: the agent and model, or None. Generated: the parts it wrote 
(code, tests, this description), or None. Human review: what you reviewed of 
the generated parts, or "Not applicable" without AI tools. You may add "- 
Prompts:" to summarize how you directed the agent. -->
   
   - Tool:
   - Generated:
   - Human review:
   


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to