zookeeper-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "ASF GitHub Bot (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (ZOOKEEPER-261) Reinitialized servers should not participate in leader election
Date Thu, 12 Jan 2017 01:27:16 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-261?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15819801#comment-15819801
] 

ASF GitHub Bot commented on ZOOKEEPER-261:
------------------------------------------

Github user eribeiro commented on a diff in the pull request:

    https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/120#discussion_r95707659
  
    --- Diff: src/java/main/org/apache/zookeeper/server/persistence/FileTxnSnapLog.java ---
    @@ -132,6 +137,9 @@ public FileTxnSnapLog(File dataDir, File snapDir) throws IOException
{
     
             txnLog = new FileTxnLog(this.dataDir);
             snapLog = new FileSnap(this.snapDir);
    +
    +        autoCreateDB = Boolean.parseBoolean(System.getProperty(ZOOKEEPER_DB_AUTOCREATE,
    --- End diff --
    
    +1 with @hanm 


> Reinitialized servers should not participate in leader election
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: ZOOKEEPER-261
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-261
>             Project: ZooKeeper
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: leaderElection, quorum
>            Reporter: Benjamin Reed
>
> A server that has lost its data should not participate in leader election until it has
resynced with a leader. Our leader election algorithm and NEW_LEADER commit assumes that the
followers voting on a leader have not lost any of their data. We should have a flag in the
data directory saying whether or not the data is preserved so that the the flag will be cleared
if the data is ever cleared.
> Here is the problematic scenario: you have have ensemble of machines A, B, and C. C is
down. the last transaction seen by C is z. a transaction, z+1, is committed on A and B. Now
there is a power outage. B's data gets reinitialized. when power comes back up, B and C comes
up, but A does not. C will be elected leader and transaction z+1 is lost. (note, this can
happen even if all three machines are up and C just responds quickly. in that case C would
tell A to truncate z+1 from its log.) in theory we haven't violated our 2f+1 guarantee, since
A is failed and B still hasn't recovered from failure, but it would be nice if when we don't
have quorum that system stops working rather than works incorrectly if we lose quorum.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Mime
View raw message