+1 (non-binding)
On Mon, Sep 9, 2024 at 6:51 PM Karthick <karthickr...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think there is a confusion. > > This BP is to fix the /api/v1/autorecovery/decommission behaviour as same > as bin/bookkeeper shell decommissionbookie CLI. > > Thanks, > Karthick > > On Mon, Sep 9, 2024 at 1:13 PM lushiji(apache) <lush...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Let me understand: is it to delete only the > > /api/v1/autorecovery/decommission API? then how to handle the command > > bin/bookkeeper shell decommissionbookie [-bookieid <bookieaddress>] ? > > > > Personally, I think if there is a problem with the > > /api/v1/autorecovery/decommission API, why not fix this API instead of > > deleting it? > > > > On Wed, Sep 4, 2024 at 2:14 PM Karthick <karthickr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Hello Everyone, > > > Can you please look into the BP-68 > > > <https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/4500/> and let me know your > > > thoughts? > > > > > > *Quick Summary:* > > > The current decommission process in Apache BookKeeper has two main > > > interfaces: the REST API and the command-line interface (CLI). However, > > > there is a discrepancy between these two methods, specifically in the > > > handling of cookie deletion. The CLI includes logic for deleting > cookies > > > associated with decommissioned Bookies, while the REST API lacks this > > > functionality. This BP proposes enhancing the REST API to include > cookie > > > deletion logic, aligning it with the behavior of the CLI. > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Karthick > > > > > >
