New issue
Advanced search Search tips
Note: Color blocks (like or ) mean that a user may not be available. Tooltip shows the reason.

Issue 881289 link

Starred by 2 users

Issue metadata

Status: Assigned
Owner:
Cc:
Components:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: ----
Pri: 2
Type: Bug



Sign in to add a comment

Generate client tags for payments data on the server

Project Member Reported by feuunk@chromium.org, Sep 6

Issue description

Payments data is never written by sync clients, and therefore does not have client tags. Currently, most USS data types use the same (ModelTagBased) processor, which does require client tags.

We currently work around this by manually generating client tags in the (ModelTagBased) processor, only for Wallet data. This feels hacky, and there is the risk that lower layers, like the worker already depend on client tags.

Instead, we will generate the tags on the server, which makes wallet more similar to all other datatypes. 

There's one concern with generating the tag on the server: There's a DCHECK in the processor that the client tag we receive from the server is identical to the tag that the client generates for the item. Given that this is a bad DCHECK condition (it requires correct server behavior), we will remove this DCHECK.

 
Labels: Sync-Triaged
Status: Assigned (was: Untriaged)
Cc: tschumann@chromium.org jkrcal@chromium.org ma...@chromium.org feuunk@chromium.org se...@chromium.org
 Issue 874001  has been merged into this issue.
Project Member

Comment 3 by bugdroid1@chromium.org, Sep 27

The following revision refers to this bug:
  https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromium/src.git/+/715c7e1847e2641d47049b7878ea7ea6dbe04998

commit 715c7e1847e2641d47049b7878ea7ea6dbe04998
Author: Mikel Astiz <mastiz@chromium.org>
Date: Thu Sep 27 21:58:37 2018

Allow bridges without support for computing client tags

We ancitipate future changes where certain bridges will lack the support
for client tag hashes. Hence, let's accomodate that in the bridge
interface and update the processor to honor the new contract.

Bug:  870624 ,881289
Change-Id: Ic871d7a9fd7cf9c9a989624e1691409aed400e39
Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/1249023
Commit-Queue: Mikel Astiz <mastiz@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Florian Uunk <feuunk@chromium.org>
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#594885}
[modify] https://crrev.com/715c7e1847e2641d47049b7878ea7ea6dbe04998/components/sync/model/model_type_change_processor.cc
[modify] https://crrev.com/715c7e1847e2641d47049b7878ea7ea6dbe04998/components/sync/model/model_type_change_processor.h
[modify] https://crrev.com/715c7e1847e2641d47049b7878ea7ea6dbe04998/components/sync/model/model_type_sync_bridge.cc
[modify] https://crrev.com/715c7e1847e2641d47049b7878ea7ea6dbe04998/components/sync/model/model_type_sync_bridge.h
[modify] https://crrev.com/715c7e1847e2641d47049b7878ea7ea6dbe04998/components/sync/model_impl/client_tag_based_model_type_processor.cc
[modify] https://crrev.com/715c7e1847e2641d47049b7878ea7ea6dbe04998/components/sync/model_impl/client_tag_based_model_type_processor.h
[modify] https://crrev.com/715c7e1847e2641d47049b7878ea7ea6dbe04998/docs/sync/uss/client_tag_based_model_type_processor.md

No progress so far. Hope to address this in Q1 next year.

Sign in to add a comment