Arvados

Total time is actually more like 15+ seconds:

15291.06 5773.91 POST create /arvados/v1/collections {"manifest_text":"","name":"New collection","ensure_unique_name":"true","alt":"json","collection":{"manifest_text":"","name":"New collection"}} null

first column is total request time and second is database time.

Perhaps this is blindingly obvious, but why do collection names need to be unique per user anyway? What happens when a collection is transferred to a different user where there's a name collision?

Tom Morris wrote:

why do collection names need to be unique per user anyway? What happens when a collection is transferred to a different user where there's a name collision?

Transferring Tom's answer: Because otherwise we wouldn't have unique names in the directory hierarchy for the FUSE driver. Note that the "owner" in this case is the owning project, not the user, so there's a misconception in the formulation of my original question.

9831-faster-unique-name @ daafdb4c939f265b4604711d0fc946a830d9d54e https://ci.curoverse.com/job/developer-run-tests/134/

@ daafdb4c

Since we are using precision of 3 digits in ms for name, I am wondering if the system is so fast that we might end up doing too many reties or running out of retries when a name collision does occur? Would sleeping for 0.1s or something in between retries be desirable?

LGTM otherwise. Thanks.