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

Create a gateway-only partial implementation of Object Lock #397

Closed
ferristocrat opened this issue Feb 7, 2024 · 4 comments
Closed

Create a gateway-only partial implementation of Object Lock #397

ferristocrat opened this issue Feb 7, 2024 · 4 comments

Comments

@ferristocrat
Copy link
Contributor

ferristocrat commented Feb 7, 2024

Goal

Completing this will make it possible to enable some object lock tests and determine how well we understand Object Lock.

What needs to be done? • Acceptance Criteria

Gateway-only/shim implementation means all tricks allowed. The state related to object lock can be stored in the object version's user metadata and can be modifiable outside the gateway (or even within the gateway!). The purpose of this is to make tests pass and figure out if there's anything that we missed during requirements gathering.

We only need to implement a small subset of Object Lock (for example, Legal Hold is out of scope at this moment). What needs to be implemented is defined in Object Lock milestone MVP section. To recap, it's:

So you only need to implement the above gateway-side only. This is very similar to what JT did for object versioning: miniogw/versioning: introduce object versioning wrapper

Depends on…

This issue does not depend on anything and can be worked on immediately.

Links

@amwolff amwolff added this to the Object Lock milestone Feb 12, 2024
@amwolff amwolff changed the title Create Shim implementation of object lock Create a gateway-only partial implementation of Object Lock Feb 13, 2024
@pwilloughby pwilloughby self-assigned this Feb 14, 2024
@pwilloughby
Copy link
Contributor

should this include retention periods set on the bucket?

@kaloyan-raev
Copy link
Member

@pwilloughby Our current understanding is that Veeam sets the retention period on each object, not on the bucket. See my comment here: storj/roadmap#47 (comment)

@storj-gerrit
Copy link

storj-gerrit bot commented Feb 22, 2024

Change cmd: force enable object lock mentions this issue.

@storj-gerrit
Copy link

storj-gerrit bot commented Mar 5, 2024

Change cmd: force enable object lock config mentions this issue.

storjBuildBot pushed a commit to storj/minio that referenced this issue Mar 6, 2024
updates storj/edge#397

Change-Id: I766b7fa0991412ade3d52700377a9babe9ef2c26
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants