hemantk-12 commented on code in PR #6453:
URL: https://github.com/apache/ozone/pull/6453#discussion_r1548748027
##########
hadoop-ozone/ozone-manager/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/ozone/om/request/snapshot/OMSnapshotPurgeRequest.java:
##########
@@ -112,9 +115,16 @@ public OMClientResponse
validateAndUpdateCache(OzoneManager ozoneManager, TermIn
omClientResponse = new OMSnapshotPurgeResponse(omResponse.build(),
snapshotDbKeys, updatedSnapInfos,
updatedPathPreviousAndGlobalSnapshots);
+
+ omMetrics.incNumSnapshotPurges();
+ LOG.info("Successfully executed snapshotPurgeRequest: {{}} along with
updating deep clean flags for " +
+ "snapshots: {} and global and previous for snapshots:{}.",
+ snapshotPurgeRequest, updatedSnapInfos.keySet(),
updatedPathPreviousAndGlobalSnapshots.keySet());
Review Comment:
Yes. I debated whether to keep it at `info` level or `debug` level. And then
decide to keep it at `info` level because whenever we see snapshot chain
corruption we don't know how the snapshot info got changed. We don't keep audit
logs for the `SnapshotPurge` API because it is an internal API and Ratis logs
don't tell all the snapshotInfo objects get updated as part of the purge.
So keeping it at `Info` level for now. Once we have confidence that all the
concurrent issues are fixed for the snapshot chain, we can change it to the
debug level.
--
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]
