Prince Raj created HDDS-16584:
---------------------------------
Summary: Object TTL configuration returns generic 400 error for
past expiration date
Key: HDDS-16584
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-16584
Project: Apache Ozone
Issue Type: Bug
Reporter: Prince Raj
h3. Description
While testing S3 bucket lifecycle configuration, I observed that providing an
expiration date in the past results in an HTTP 400 error, but the response does
not provide a meaningful error message explaining that the lifecycle date is
invalid because it is in the past.
The API should provide a clear validation error explaining why the lifecycle
configuration was rejected.
h3. Steps to Reproduce
# Create a lifecycle configuration with an expiration date in the past.
{{{
"Rules": [\{
"ID": "expire-key1-fso",
"Status": "Enabled",
"Filter": {
"Prefix": "key1/"
},
"Expiration": \{
"Date": "2020-01-01T00:00:00Z"
}
}]
}}}
# Apply the lifecycle configuration:
{{aws s3api put-bucket-lifecycle-configuration \
--bucket <bucket-name> \
--lifecycle-configuration file://lifecycle.json}}
# Observe the response.
h3. Actual Result
The request fails with {*}HTTP 400 / InvalidRequest{*}, but the response only
contains a generic error:
{{An error occurred (InvalidRequest) when calling the
PutBucketLifecycleConfiguration operation: Invalid Request}}
There is no indication that the expiration date is rejected because it is in
the past.
h3. Expected Result
The API should reject the invalid lifecycle configuration with a meaningful
validation error that clearly indicates the reason for rejection, for example
that the supplied expiration date is in the past.
This would make it easier for users to identify and correct invalid lifecycle
configurations.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
