[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BOOKKEEPER-237?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13290279#comment-13290279
]
Flavio Junqueira commented on BOOKKEEPER-237:
---------------------------------------------
Ivan, Your proposed approach sounds like a more detailed version of what I
posted before after a discussion with Roger:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BOOKKEEPER-237?focusedCommentId=13281048&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13281048
Having the central auditor would make it simpler to balance the load across the
bookies, but I don't completely dislike your distributed proposal. In general,
I prefer symmetric approaches as I have stated before.
> Automatic recovery of under-replicated ledgers and its entries
> --------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: BOOKKEEPER-237
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BOOKKEEPER-237
> Project: Bookkeeper
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: bookkeeper-client, bookkeeper-server
> Affects Versions: 4.0.0
> Reporter: Rakesh R
> Assignee: Rakesh R
> Attachments: Auto Recovery Detection - distributed chain
> approach.doc, Auto Recovery and Bookie sync-ups.pdf
>
>
> As per the current design of BookKeeper, if one of the BookKeeper server
> dies, there is no automatic mechanism to identify and recover the under
> replicated ledgers and its corresponding entries. This would lead to losing
> the successfully written entries, which will be a critical problem in
> sensitive systems. This document is trying to describe few proposals to
> overcome these limitations.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
