[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-2434?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13152123#comment-13152123
 ] 

paul cannon commented on CASSANDRA-2434:
----------------------------------------

No, I do think that if we tore out the existing code and replaced it, it would 
be simpler overall, but (a) that would probably also be true if we rewrote the 
existing code without implementing this; (b) it will be rather a lot of work; 
and (c) it may engender a whole new generation of subtle corner-case bugs (or 
maybe it will eliminate a lot of such bugs that already exist).
                
> range movements can violate consistency
> ---------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-2434
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-2434
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Peter Schuller
>            Assignee: paul cannon
>             Fix For: 1.0.4
>
>         Attachments: 2434-3.patch.txt, 2434-testery.patch.txt
>
>
> My reading (a while ago) of the code indicates that there is no logic 
> involved during bootstrapping that avoids consistency level violations. If I 
> recall correctly it just grabs neighbors that are currently up.
> There are at least two issues I have with this behavior:
> * If I have a cluster where I have applications relying on QUORUM with RF=3, 
> and bootstrapping complete based on only one node, I have just violated the 
> supposedly guaranteed consistency semantics of the cluster.
> * Nodes can flap up and down at any time, so even if a human takes care to 
> look at which nodes are up and things about it carefully before 
> bootstrapping, there's no guarantee.
> A complication is that not only does it depend on use-case where this is an 
> issue (if all you ever do you do at CL.ONE, it's fine); even in a cluster 
> which is otherwise used for QUORUM operations you may wish to accept 
> less-than-quorum nodes during bootstrap in various emergency situations.
> A potential easy fix is to have bootstrap take an argument which is the 
> number of hosts to bootstrap from, or to assume QUORUM if none is given.
> (A related concern is bootstrapping across data centers. You may *want* to 
> bootstrap to a local node and then do a repair to avoid sending loads of data 
> across DC:s while still achieving consistency. Or even if you don't care 
> about the consistency issues, I don't think there is currently a way to 
> bootstrap from local nodes only.)
> Thoughts?

--
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

        

Reply via email to