Fix alert when expiring delete-markers #2681
Open
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This helps troubleshooting when the issue happens. Issue: BB-719
EODM happens when a DeleteMarker is the only remaining revision of an object. When expiring it, either because `ExpiredObjectDeleteMarker` is set in the rule or because it matches the age criteria, the `transitionTime` is thus not intrinsic to the DeleteMarker but really depends on the time the other revisions were removed. We don't have this information, so being precise is not possible here; however we must not use the DeleteMarker's `LastModified` date: - it creates seemingly very slow expiration latency metrics (since the DeleteMarker may be arbitrary old, even though expiration is possible only for a very short time) - which triggers alerts about slow lifecycle, even though it is working as expected. In addition, depending on the exact rule, there may not be an age limit in that specific rule, which causes `getTransitionTimestamp()` to return `null`, which prevents collecting the metrics properly. Consequently, we now just use the current time in that case, to avoid making metrics suspicious and triggering alert. Issue: BB-719
Hello francoisferrand,My role is to assist you with the merge of this Available options
Available commands
Status report is not available. |
DarkIsDude
reviewed
Oct 20, 2025
| .setAttribute('target.key', verToExpire.Key) | ||
| .setAttribute('target.version', verToExpire.VersionId) | ||
| .setAttribute('details.dataStoreName', verToExpire.StorageClass || '') | ||
| // details.lastModified is not set for NCVE... |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What is NCVE ? Non current version expiration ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Guess so, but is this comment a TODO ?
SylvainSenechal
approved these changes
Oct 24, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
EODM happens when a DeleteMarker is the only remaining revision of an object.
When expiring it, either because ExpiredObjectDeleteMarker is set in the rule or because it matches the age criteria, the transitionTime is thus not intrinsic to the DeleteMarker but really depends on the time the other revisions were removed.
We don't have this information, so being precise is not possible here; however we must not use the DeleteMarker's LastModified date: it creates seemingly very slow expiration latency metrics (since the DeleteMarker may be arbitrary old, even though expiration is possible only for a very short time) which triggers alerts about slow lifecycle, even though it is working as expected.
In addition, depending on the exact rule, there may not be an age limit in that specific rule, which causes getTransitionTimestamp() to return null, which prevents collecting the metrics properly.
Consequently, we now just use the current time in that case, to avoid making metrics suspicious and triggering alert.
Issue: BB-719