Skip to content

branch-4.2: [refactor](storage) Unify BE and Recycler object clients - #69586

Open
sollhui wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:branch-4.2from
sollhui:pick-66350-branch-4.2
Open

branch-4.2: [refactor](storage) Unify BE and Recycler object clients#69586
sollhui wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:branch-4.2from
sollhui:pick-66350-branch-4.2

Conversation

@sollhui

@sollhui sollhui commented Oct 25, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What problem does this PR solve?

Related PR: #66350

Backport #66350 to branch-4.2 to unify BE and Recycler object-storage clients under common/cpp/obj-client, including shared provider implementations, credential factories, rate-limit decorators, listing and recursive deletion.

Resolve branch conflicts while preserving 4.2's native GCP client construction and GCS V4 signed URLs, container credential token-file support, bounded S3 response streams, and read error diagnostics. Omit changes to Kinesis and Hive code/tests absent from 4.2, and omit Recycler fault-injection configuration absent from this branch.

Release note

None

Check List (For Author)

  • Test:
    • Compilation and tests skipped as requested.
    • C++ formatting checked with clang-format 16.0.5; git diff --check passes.
    • CI requested with run buildall.
  • Behavior changed: Same object-client refactor as [refactor](storage) Unify BE and Recycler object clients #66350, adapted to retain existing 4.2 functionality.
  • Does this need documentation: No.

@sollhui
sollhui requested a review from yiguolei as a code owner October 25, 2026 09:41
@hello-stephen

hello-stephen commented Oct 25, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thank you for your contribution to Apache Doris.
Don't know what should be done next? See How to process your PR.

Please clearly describe your PR:

  1. What problem was fixed (it's best to include specific error reporting information). How it was fixed.
  2. Which behaviors were modified. What was the previous behavior, what is it now, why was it modified, and what possible impacts might there be.
  3. What features were added. Why was this function added?
  4. Which code was refactored and why was this part of the code refactored?
  5. Which functions were optimized and what is the difference before and after the optimization?

@sollhui

sollhui commented Oct 25, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

run buildall

@hello-stephen

hello-stephen commented Oct 25, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

BE UT Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 46.19% (91/197) 🎉

Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

Category Coverage
Function Coverage 64.30% (29946/46571)
Line Coverage 49.17% (316043/642779)
Region Coverage 44.97% (254439/565814)
Branch Coverage 46.62% (120002/257389)

@hello-stephen

hello-stephen commented Oct 25, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

BE Regression && UT Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 57.58% (114/198) 🎉

Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

Category Coverage
Function Coverage 76.23% (34482/45233)
Line Coverage 61.12% (389648/637505)
Region Coverage 57.88% (328074/566796)
Branch Coverage 58.92% (151480/257105)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@yiguolei yiguolei Awaiting requested review from yiguolei yiguolei is a code owner

At least 1 approving review is required to merge this pull request.

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@sollhui @hello-stephen