cloud.s3 backend: investigate DNS failures; possibly fall back to bucket-in-path for retries if bucket-in-host fails #2068

New Issue

tahoe-lafs · 2013-08-29T13:20:57Z

daira commented

2013-08-29 13:20:57 +00:00

LeastAuthority.com's monitoring sees occasional DNS errors https://github.com/LeastAuthority/leastauthority.com/issues/30 when trying to resolve $BUCKETNAME.s3.amazonaws.com from an EC2 instance. It could fall back to a bucket-in-path URL for retries in this case. Alternatively, it may be that the existing retry is sufficient to mask these failures, but we need to know whether that is the case. (The monitoring code does not retry.)

(We originally switched to bucket-in-host URLs because bucket-in-path requests were sometimes failing, claiming that we were using the wrong endpoint. If that happens in the same situation as the DNS failures, then we might not be able to improve reliability by falling back to bucket-in-path.)

LeastAuthority.com's monitoring sees occasional DNS errors <https://github.com/LeastAuthority/leastauthority.com/issues/30> when trying to resolve $BUCKETNAME.s3.amazonaws.com from an EC2 instance. It could fall back to a bucket-in-path URL for retries in this case. Alternatively, it may be that the existing retry is sufficient to mask these failures, but we need to know whether that is the case. (The monitoring code does not retry.) (We originally switched to bucket-in-host URLs because bucket-in-path requests were sometimes failing, claiming that we were using the wrong endpoint. If that happens in the same situation as the DNS failures, then we might not be able to improve reliability by falling back to bucket-in-path.)

tahoe-lafs added the

labels 2013-08-29 13:20:57 +00:00

tahoe-lafs added this to the undecided milestone 2013-08-29 13:20:57 +00:00

tahoe-lafs modified the milestone from undecided to 1.11.0

2015-01-29 19:53:36 +00:00

tahoe-lafs modified the milestone from 1.11.0 to 1.12.0

2015-02-08 23:52:56 +00:00

warner commented

2016-03-22 05:02:25 +00:00

Milestone renamed

warner modified the milestone from 1.12.0 to 1.13.0

2016-03-22 05:02:25 +00:00

warner commented

2016-06-28 18:17:14 +00:00

renaming milestone

warner modified the milestone from 1.13.0 to 1.14.0

2016-06-28 18:17:14 +00:00

exarkun commented

2020-06-30 14:45:13 +00:00

Moving open issues out of closed milestones.

exarkun modified the milestone from 1.14.0 to 1.15.0

2020-06-30 14:45:13 +00:00

exarkun commented

2020-10-30 12:35:44 +00:00

The established line of development on the "cloud backend" branch has been abandoned. This ticket is being closed as part of a batch-ticket cleanup for "cloud backend"-related tickets.

If this is a bug, it is probably genuinely no longer relevant. The "cloud backend" branch is too large and unwieldy to ever be merged into the main line of development (particularly now that the Python 3 porting effort is significantly underway).

If this is a feature, it may be relevant to some future efforts - if they are sufficiently similar to the "cloud backend" effort - but I am still closing it because there are no immediate plans for a new development effort in such a direction.

Tickets related to the "leasedb" are included in this set because the "leasedb" code is in the "cloud backend" branch and fairly well intertwined with the "cloud backend". If there is interest in lease implementation change at some future time then that effort will essentially have to be restarted as well.

The established line of development on the "cloud backend" branch has been abandoned. This ticket is being closed as part of a batch-ticket cleanup for "cloud backend"-related tickets. If this is a bug, it is probably genuinely no longer relevant. The "cloud backend" branch is too large and unwieldy to ever be merged into the main line of development (particularly now that the Python 3 porting effort is significantly underway). If this is a feature, it may be relevant to some future efforts - if they are sufficiently similar to the "cloud backend" effort - but I am still closing it because there are no immediate plans for a new development effort in such a direction. Tickets related to the "leasedb" are included in this set because the "leasedb" code is in the "cloud backend" branch and fairly well intertwined with the "cloud backend". If there is interest in lease implementation change at some future time then that effort will essentially have to be restarted as well.

exarkun added the

wontfix

label 2020-10-30 12:35:44 +00:00

exarkun closed this issue

2020-10-30 12:35:44 +00:00

Sign in to join this conversation.