[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-16394?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Prince Raj updated HDDS-16394:
------------------------------
Description:
h2. Summary
{{PutBucketLifecycleConfiguration}} correctly rejects lifecycle configurations
containing duplicate rule IDs with {*}HTTP 400 / InvalidRequest{*}. However,
the returned error message is too generic and does not indicate that duplicate
rule IDs caused the failure or identify the duplicated ID.
h2. Steps to Reproduce
# Create a lifecycle configuration containing duplicate rule IDs:
{code:java}
{{{
"Rules": [
{
"ID": "expire-rule",
"Status": "Disabled",
"Filter":
{ "Prefix": "key1/" }
,
"Expiration": {
"Date": "2026-09-05T00:00:00Z"
}
},
{
"ID": "expire-rule",
"Status": "Enabled",
"Filter":
{ "Prefix": "key2/" }
,
"Expiration": {
"Date": "2026-09-05T00:00:00Z"
}
}
]
}}}
{code}
# Send the configuration using {{{}PutBucketLifecycleConfiguration{}}}.
h2. Actual Behavior
The request is correctly rejected with:
{{HTTP 400
InvalidRequest: Invalid Request}}
However, the error message does not indicate that the failure was caused by
duplicate rule IDs.
h2. Expected Behavior
The request should continue to return *HTTP 400 / InvalidRequest* (or an
equivalent validation error), but the error message should provide actionable
information, for example:
{{Duplicate rule ID 'expire-rule' found in lifecycle configuration}}
or at minimum:
{{Duplicate rule IDs found}}
This would make it clear to the user why the lifecycle configuration was
rejected.
h2. Suggested Fix
* Propagate the underlying validation error message to the S3 response instead
of returning only the generic {{Invalid Request}} message.
* Include the duplicated rule ID in the validation error where possible.
* Ensure the response remains compliant with the expected S3 error type/status
code.
was:
h2. Summary
{{PutBucketLifecycleConfiguration}} correctly rejects lifecycle configurations
containing duplicate rule IDs with {*}HTTP 400 / InvalidRequest{*}. However,
the returned error message is too generic and does not indicate that duplicate
rule IDs caused the failure or identify the duplicated ID.
h2. Steps to Reproduce
# Create a lifecycle configuration containing duplicate rule IDs:
{{{
"Rules": [
\{
"ID": "expire-rule",
"Status": "Disabled",
"Filter": {
"Prefix": "key1/"
},
"Expiration": \{
"Date": "2026-09-05T00:00:00Z"
}
},
\{
"ID": "expire-rule",
"Status": "Enabled",
"Filter": {
"Prefix": "key2/"
},
"Expiration": \{
"Date": "2026-09-05T00:00:00Z"
}
}
]
}}}
# Send the configuration using {{{}PutBucketLifecycleConfiguration{}}}.
h2. Actual Behavior
The request is correctly rejected with:
{{HTTP 400
InvalidRequest: Invalid Request}}
However, the error message does not indicate that the failure was caused by
duplicate rule IDs.
h2. Expected Behavior
The request should continue to return *HTTP 400 / InvalidRequest* (or an
equivalent validation error), but the error message should provide actionable
information, for example:
{{Duplicate rule ID 'expire-rule' found in lifecycle configuration}}
or at minimum:
{{Duplicate rule IDs found}}
This would make it clear to the user why the lifecycle configuration was
rejected.
h2. Suggested Fix
* Propagate the underlying validation error message to the S3 response instead
of returning only the generic {{Invalid Request}} message.
* Include the duplicated rule ID in the validation error where possible.
* Ensure the response remains compliant with the expected S3 error type/status
code.
> PutBucketLifecycle returns generic "Invalid Request" for duplicate rule IDs
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDDS-16394
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-16394
> Project: Apache Ozone
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Prince Raj
> Priority: Major
>
> h2. Summary
> {{PutBucketLifecycleConfiguration}} correctly rejects lifecycle
> configurations containing duplicate rule IDs with {*}HTTP 400 /
> InvalidRequest{*}. However, the returned error message is too generic and
> does not indicate that duplicate rule IDs caused the failure or identify the
> duplicated ID.
> h2. Steps to Reproduce
> # Create a lifecycle configuration containing duplicate rule IDs:
>
>
> {code:java}
> {{{
> "Rules": [
> {
> "ID": "expire-rule",
> "Status": "Disabled",
> "Filter":
> { "Prefix": "key1/" }
> ,
> "Expiration": {
> "Date": "2026-09-05T00:00:00Z"
> }
> },
> {
> "ID": "expire-rule",
> "Status": "Enabled",
> "Filter":
> { "Prefix": "key2/" }
> ,
> "Expiration": {
> "Date": "2026-09-05T00:00:00Z"
> }
> }
> ]
> }}}
> {code}
>
> # Send the configuration using {{{}PutBucketLifecycleConfiguration{}}}.
> h2. Actual Behavior
> The request is correctly rejected with:
>
> {{HTTP 400
> InvalidRequest: Invalid Request}}
> However, the error message does not indicate that the failure was caused by
> duplicate rule IDs.
> h2. Expected Behavior
> The request should continue to return *HTTP 400 / InvalidRequest* (or an
> equivalent validation error), but the error message should provide actionable
> information, for example:
>
> {{Duplicate rule ID 'expire-rule' found in lifecycle configuration}}
> or at minimum:
>
> {{Duplicate rule IDs found}}
> This would make it clear to the user why the lifecycle configuration was
> rejected.
> h2. Suggested Fix
> * Propagate the underlying validation error message to the S3 response
> instead of returning only the generic {{Invalid Request}} message.
> * Include the duplicated rule ID in the validation error where possible.
> * Ensure the response remains compliant with the expected S3 error
> type/status code.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
