Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

BT-724 Fix BlobPathBuilder failing on retrieving existing filesystem #6816

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Aug 5, 2022
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 5 commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -10,11 +10,13 @@ import cromwell.filesystems.blob.BlobPathBuilder._

import java.net.MalformedURLException
import java.net.URI
import java.nio.file.FileSystemNotFoundException
import java.nio.file.FileSystems
import scala.jdk.CollectionConverters._
import scala.language.postfixOps
import scala.util.Failure
import scala.util.Try
import java.nio.file.FileSystem

object BlobPathBuilder {

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -64,14 +66,20 @@ class BlobPathBuilder(credential: AzureSasCredential, container: String, endpoin
val fileSystemConfig: Map[String, Object] = Map((AzureFileSystem.AZURE_STORAGE_SAS_TOKEN_CREDENTIAL, credential),
(AzureFileSystem.AZURE_STORAGE_FILE_STORES, container))

def retrieveFilesystem(): Try[FileSystem] = {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It would be good to pass a URI into this function rather than having it access the value on the class and create it multiple times. Total nitpicking, though, no need to hold merging up for that, just something to think about next time we're in here.

Try(FileSystems.getFileSystem(new URI("azb://?endpoint=" + endpoint))) recover {
// If no filesystem already exists, this will create a new connection, with the provided configs
case _: FileSystemNotFoundException => FileSystems.newFileSystem(new URI("azb://?endpoint=" + endpoint), fileSystemConfig.asJava)
}
}

def build(string: String): Try[BlobPath] = {
validateBlobPath(string, container, endpoint) match {
case ValidBlobPath(path) =>
Try {
val fileSystem = FileSystems.newFileSystem(new URI("azb://?endpoint=" + endpoint), fileSystemConfig.asJava)
val blobStoragePath = fileSystem.getPath(path)
BlobPath(blobStoragePath, endpoint, container)
}
case ValidBlobPath(path) => for {
fileSystem <- retrieveFilesystem()
nioPath <- Try(fileSystem.getPath(path))
blobPath = BlobPath(nioPath, endpoint, container)
} yield blobPath
case UnparsableBlobPath(errorMessage: Throwable) => Failure(errorMessage)
}
}
Expand Down
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -62,4 +62,15 @@ class BlobPathBuilderSpec extends AnyFlatSpec with Matchers{
val fileText = (is.readAllBytes.map(_.toChar)).mkString
fileText should include ("This is my test file!!!! Did it work?")
}

ignore should "build duplicate blob paths in the same filesystem" in {
val endpoint = BlobPathBuilderSpec.buildEndpoint("coaexternalstorage")
val store = "inputs"
val evalPath = "/test/inputFile.txt"
val sas = "{SAS TOKEN HERE}"
val testString = endpoint + "/" + store + evalPath
val blobPath1: BlobPath = new BlobPathBuilder(new AzureSasCredential(sas), store, endpoint) build testString getOrElse fail()
val blobPath2: BlobPath = new BlobPathBuilder(new AzureSasCredential(sas), store, endpoint) build testString getOrElse fail()
blobPath1 should equal(blobPath2)
}
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hmm, this is a good demonstration but I don't know that we actually want to check it in. This is a good topic to discuss in Michael's meeting next week, how should we be handling automated tests for this stuff?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Agreed here, I've been leaving this for the time being because I have been using it to verify I haven't broken these changes, but I can remove this before merge

}