Improvements to RucioFileCatalogClient, compatibility of older client with Rucio 41 server - #8744
Draft
maxnoe wants to merge 4 commits into
Draft
Improvements to RucioFileCatalogClient, compatibility of older client with Rucio 41 server#8744maxnoe wants to merge 4 commits into
maxnoe wants to merge 4 commits into
Conversation
Contributor
Author
maxnoe
force-pushed
the
rucio-41-compat
branch
from
August 21, 2026 16:09
e4877a6 to
fde71cf
Compare
maxnoe
force-pushed
the
rucio-41-compat
branch
from
August 21, 2026 16:22
fde71cf to
323fd9a
Compare
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
BEGINRELEASENOTES
ENDRELEASENOTES
This makes a couple of small updates to the
RucioFileCatalogClienttriggered by issues we discovered in the CTAO integration test environment when running DIRAC with a rucio client version 40 but a rucio server version 41.In Rucio 41, a long-standing bug ignoring the
pluginparameter forget_metadata_bulkwas fixed, which in prior versions resulted in theDID_COLUMNmetadata being returned regardless of theplugin=parameter.However, this breaks the
RFCin the combination of a rucio 40 client with a rucio 41 server (a combination which is allowed according to Rucio's support policy of newer servers keeping compatibility with older clients), becauseget_metadata_bulkin rucio 40 usesplugin='JSON"as the default. This worked before becausepluginwas ignored, however, with a Rucio 41 server,pluginis correctly respected, which results in theJSONmetadata being returned where the RFC actually expects theDID_COLUMNmetadata (e.g. containing size in bytes, checksums, did type).Using Rucio client 41 with Rucio server 41 works, because also the default plugin for
get_metadata_bulkwas changed toDID_COLUMN.Here, it is better to be explicit though: everywhere DIRAC needs the basic did metadata,
DID_COLUMNis explicitly added.I also changed a couple of calls of
get_did_metadatatoget_did, which is cheaper to execute as it does not involve the metadata plugin machinery.