Skip to content

branch-4.0: [fix](fe) Reuse Ranger Doris access controller #65570 - #65613

Merged
morningman merged 1 commit into
branch-4.0from
auto-pick-65570-branch-4.0
Jul 15, 2026
Merged

branch-4.0: [fix](fe) Reuse Ranger Doris access controller #65570#65613
morningman merged 1 commit into
branch-4.0from
auto-pick-65570-branch-4.0

Conversation

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Cherry-picked from #65570

### What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: close #65524

Related PR: #45645

Problem Summary:

When Ranger Doris authorization is enabled, constructing a
`RangerDorisAccessController` initializes a Ranger plugin and starts a
`PolicyRefresher` background thread. Metadata checkpoints create
temporary `Env` instances, and each `Env` previously received a newly
constructed Ranger Doris access controller. Destroying the checkpoint
`Env` only released the `Env` reference, so the refresher threads
remained alive. A successful checkpoint could therefore leak two
`PolicyRefresher` threads.

This change uses an initialization-on-demand holder in
`RangerDorisAccessControllerFactory` so all `Env` instances in the FE
process share one lazily initialized controller and one refresher
thread. The unit test verifies that multiple factory instances construct
and return only one controller.
@github-actions
github-actions Bot requested a review from morningman as a code owner July 15, 2026 01:45
@hello-stephen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thank you for your contribution to Apache Doris.
Don't know what should be done next? See How to process your PR.

Please clearly describe your PR:

  1. What problem was fixed (it's best to include specific error reporting information). How it was fixed.
  2. Which behaviors were modified. What was the previous behavior, what is it now, why was it modified, and what possible impacts might there be.
  3. What features were added. Why was this function added?
  4. Which code was refactored and why was this part of the code refactored?
  5. Which functions were optimized and what is the difference before and after the optimization?

@hello-stephen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

run buildall

@hello-stephen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

FE UT Coverage Report

Increment line coverage 100.00% (2/2) 🎉
Increment coverage report
Complete coverage report

@morningman
morningman merged commit f8368f9 into branch-4.0 Jul 15, 2026
28 of 32 checks passed
@github-actions
github-actions Bot deleted the auto-pick-65570-branch-4.0 branch July 15, 2026 05:59
@github-actions github-actions Bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by one committer. label Jul 15, 2026
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

PR approved by at least one committer and no changes requested.

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

PR approved by anyone and no changes requested.

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

Labels

approved Indicates a PR has been approved by one committer. reviewed

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants