Repository navigation
feat: add object retention feature - #2277
Conversation
product-auto-label
Bot
added
size: l
|
|
||
| public static Builder newBuilder() { | ||
| return new Builder(); | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I can't remember, do we usually do toBuilder() for the nested model classes or only the top level ones?
| // Create a bucket with object retention enabled | ||
| storage.create( | ||
| BucketInfo.newBuilder(bucketName).build(), BucketTargetOption.enableObjectRetention(true)); | ||
|
|
||
| try { | ||
| Bucket remoteBucket = storage.get(bucketName); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If interested, you could use the TemporaryBucket helper to create and automatically cleanup the bucket. Example of this
| dateTimeCodec::encode, | ||
| to::setRetentionExpirationTime); | ||
| if (from.getRetention() == null) { | ||
| to.setRetention(Data.nullOf(StorageObject.Retention.class)); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What was the conclusion on detecting if a user set retention to null vs. it not being modified?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It doesn't work, due to the modified fields not being passed along to the final patch call. I talked to ben and we agreed to just do it this way, there's precedent for it in the logging encoding
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for clarifying, is this value mutable once set?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Only certain cases work (i.e. going from Unlocked to Locked, reducing the retainUntilTime on an unlocked policy, and setting to null), and you have to pass in overrideUnlockedRetention for any of those cases to work, but yes
No longer blocking, but tests can't pass yet so not approving
|
The current failure is just because the test project isn't allowlisted yet, it should be soon |
JesseLovelace
added
the
kokoro:force-run
yoshi-kokoro
removed
the
kokoro:force-run
JesseLovelace
added
the
kokoro:force-run
yoshi-kokoro
removed
kokoro:force-run
Adds the object retention feature and tests