Skip to content

HDDS-14611. Rename committed bytes to finalized key bytes and align committed space terminology#9871

Open
priyeshkaratha wants to merge 1 commit intoapache:masterfrom
priyeshkaratha:HDDS-14611
Open

HDDS-14611. Rename committed bytes to finalized key bytes and align committed space terminology#9871
priyeshkaratha wants to merge 1 commit intoapache:masterfrom
priyeshkaratha:HDDS-14611

Conversation

@priyeshkaratha
Copy link
Contributor

@priyeshkaratha priyeshkaratha commented Mar 6, 2026

What changes were proposed in this pull request?

The term committed used in the code to indicate the pre-allocated commit bytes in the storage report. But in StorageDistribution report committed used is to indicate the total bytes completed/finalized written to ozone. So here refactoring the code to change pre-allocated container bytes use term committed for writen complete size user the tern finalizedKeyBytes.

What is the link to the Apache JIRA

HDDS-14611

How was this patch tested?

Tested using existing unit testcase and integration tests.
Tested UI integration manually
image

@priyeshkaratha priyeshkaratha marked this pull request as ready for review March 6, 2026 08:47
Copy link
Contributor

@sreejasahithi sreejasahithi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @priyeshkaratha for working on this.

I think we should consider updating capacity.constants.tsx to use the new field names or was this intentional?:


totalOzonePreAllocatedContainerSpace: 0 -> totalOzoneCommittedSpace: 0

committedKeyBytes: 0 -> finalizedKeyBytes: 0

@priyeshkaratha
Copy link
Contributor Author

I think we should consider updating capacity.constants.tsx to use the new field names or was this intentional?:

I couldn't get your point. Renaming already considered.

@sreejasahithi
Copy link
Contributor

I think we should consider updating capacity.constants.tsx to use the new field names or was this intentional?:

I couldn't get your point. Renaming already considered.

Right, this is already fixed. Sorry for the confusion I missed this change in my review. Thanks for clarifying!

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

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants