table sync: adapt to new layout history

src/table/replication/fullcopy.rs

@@ -1,3 +1,4 @@
+use std::iter::FromIterator;
 use std::sync::Arc;
 
 use garage_rpc::layout::*;
@@ -6,10 +7,17 @@ use garage_util::data::*;
 
 use crate::replication::*;
 
+// TODO: find a way to track layout changes for this as well
+// The hard thing is that this data is stored also on gateway nodes,
+// whereas sharded data is stored only on non-Gateway nodes (storage nodes)
+// Also we want to be more tolerant to failures of gateways so we don't
+// want to do too much holding back of data when progress of gateway
+// nodes is not reported in the layout history's ack/sync/sync_ack maps.
+
 /// Full replication schema: all nodes store everything
-/// Writes are disseminated in an epidemic manner in the network
 /// Advantage: do all reads locally, extremely fast
 /// Inconvenient: only suitable to reasonably small tables
+/// Inconvenient: if some writes fail, nodes will read outdated data
 #[derive(Clone)]
 pub struct TableFullReplication {
 	/// The membership manager of this node
@@ -44,7 +52,18 @@ impl TableReplication for TableFullReplication {
 	fn partition_of(&self, _hash: &Hash) -> Partition {
 		0u16
 	}
-	fn partitions(&self) -> Vec<(Partition, Hash)> {
-		vec![(0u16, [0u8; 32].into())]
+
+	fn sync_partitions(&self) -> SyncPartitions {
+		let layout = self.system.cluster_layout();
+		let layout_version = layout.current().version;
+		SyncPartitions {
+			layout_version,
+			partitions: vec![SyncPartition {
+				partition: 0u16,
+				first_hash: [0u8; 32].into(),
+				last_hash: [0xff; 32].into(),
+				storage_nodes: Vec::from_iter(layout.current().node_ids().to_vec()),
+			}],
+		}
 	}
 }