The problem in current code was we were removing
an entry from a lock lockerMap without considering
the fact that different entry for same resource is
a possibility due the nature of locks that can be
acquired in parallel before we decide if the lock
is considered stale
A sequence of events is as follows
- Lock("resource")
- lockMaintenance(finds a long lived lock in this "resource")
- Owner node rebooted which now retruns Expired() as true for
this "resource"
- Unlock("resource") which succeeded in quorum
- Now by this time application retried and acquired a new
Lock() on the same "resource"
- Now that we have Expired() true from the previous call,
we proceed to purge the entry from the local lockMap()
local lockMap reports a different entry for the expired
UID which results in a spurious log entry.
This PR removes this logging as this situation is an
expected scenario.