MSTransferor Inconsistency with Rucio Rules for Recreated Rucio rules

[hassan11196]

Impact of the bug MSTransferor

There's an inconsistency between Rucio and MSTransferor. This happens when a transfer rule in Rucio is recreated for data that got stuck during the transfer process.

A specific request was stuck in the staging phase for over 150 days [1][2]. Upon investigation, it was discovered that one of its rules had become stuck and was then deleted. Felipe Gomez created a new rule for the transfer, and this time the data was successfully transferred. Rucio indicates that all 12 locks are functioning correctly [3], but MSTransferor is not showing 100% completion [3].

The question is: How can we make MSTransferor recognize and sync with the rules created outside of it in Rucio?

For now I have manually staged this workflow.

[1] Stuck request details: https://dmytro.web.cern.ch/dmytro/cmsprodmon/workflows.php?prep_id=task_B2G-RunIISummer20UL16MiniAODAPVv2-01421

[2] Jira Issue report: https://its.cern.ch/jira/browse/CMSPROD-71

[3] Rucio dataset: https://cms-rucio-webui.cern.ch/did?scope=cms&name=/ZprimeToZHToZlepHinc_narrow_M-4500_TuneCP5_13TeV-madgraph-pythia8/RunIISummer20UL16RECOAPV-106X_mcRun2_asymptotic_preVFP_v8-v2/AODSIM

[4] MSTransferor request info: https://cmsweb.cern.ch/ms-transferor/data/info?request=cmsunified_task_B2G-RunIISummer20UL16MiniAODAPVv2-01421__v1_T_230426_141813_9597

@haozturk @flgomezc