Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-zookeeper-user-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-zookeeper-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DD73D1838E for ; Wed, 16 Mar 2016 09:22:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 83236 invoked by uid 500); 16 Mar 2016 09:22:28 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-zookeeper-user-archive@zookeeper.apache.org Received: (qmail 83180 invoked by uid 500); 16 Mar 2016 09:22:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@zookeeper.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@zookeeper.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@zookeeper.apache.org Received: (qmail 83169 invoked by uid 99); 16 Mar 2016 09:22:27 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd1-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 16 Mar 2016 09:22:27 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 5EA6CC2B36 for ; Wed, 16 Mar 2016 09:22:27 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd1-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.72 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.72 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-lw-us.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd1-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.7]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XwA4Q24ny7ja for ; Wed, 16 Mar 2016 09:22:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wm0-f47.google.com (mail-wm0-f47.google.com [74.125.82.47]) by mx1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTPS id C04EA5FB15 for ; Wed, 16 Mar 2016 09:22:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wm0-f47.google.com with SMTP id l68so62725006wml.1 for ; Wed, 16 Mar 2016 02:22:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=vZlVa1Npt3OQocOlsltZg/FIV9fJBAfZceJj2qGKaLg=; b=MV1jEyOK/Wc58kQbA/Lvajrra6GZW2sxrPiF+enFLgVeB9xuDo46VgHbpN61VZabj4 AS21Kw9pIV5Qd5jecGluBlP0gykyIBfw3y3DpztPdbVz7rJvb8RepS0ITyfxa01iyAGF sVOqIWdL5ax4mon/p7OdXJYmdnWj0rbHfZvGNGGio3H4ZvrFeEsWuixnRGYHts+GH3Tz WNuWINtzgWzgzz3WkkmZlY+rhJ985zY3UfBtD20DM9DqA9gBp4WDAQQzOhUYTmzGANqy qqRqtIwv2lfT313mHZfTtbBIvRmIK+iG5/MY5xWyHncan3O0GLew1vuQdrKhk8RQAH2D 3DPw== X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJIOJPEAtVp1VlwNi+LC4+7zFYwbI1q2L9AwwN5ODny40wTrZ9FVL9I2YjfZE1Gf4Q== X-Received: by 10.194.103.198 with SMTP id fy6mr3021608wjb.48.1458120143746; Wed, 16 Mar 2016 02:22:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.64] (host109-157-176-179.range109-157.btcentralplus.com. [109.157.176.179]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m6sm2105944wje.21.2016.03.16.02.22.23 for (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 16 Mar 2016 02:22:23 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\)) Subject: Re: issue with read-only observer nodes From: Flavio Junqueira In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2016 09:22:21 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <6AC2E3D6-C18E-415F-B20D-8B6DAE471BAB@apache.org> References: To: user@zookeeper.apache.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104) Hi Jason, It does sound like a bug and I'm not aware of a fix. We should look into it. -Flavio > On 15 Mar 2016, at 17:15, Jason Rosenberg wrote: > > All, > > I just filed this JIRA: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2389 > > It seems that read-only observer nodes don't properly transition into > read-only mode, they fail load any of their synced log data (but if you > restart them in read-only mode, they do read the synced data). > > This is with version 3.4.8. > > Is this a known issue? Or an expected behavior? > > It seems like read-only observers would be relatively unusable with the > current behavior.... > > Am I missing something? Are people in general using read-only observer > nodes? > > Thanks, > > Jason