[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-1080?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13002000#comment-13002000
]
Filipe Manana commented on COUCHDB-1080:
----------------------------------------
Randall,
+ ?LOG_ERROR("checkpoint failure: a database was closed (replication "
+ "count exceeds max_dbs_open?)", []),
+ exit({checkpoint_commit_failure, database_closed})
I still don't think this log message is right. The call to _ensure_full_commit
might fail for several reasons, specially for remote databases. Why do you
assume the database was closed, and completely ignore the failure reason? I
think the right thing to do is exiting with {checkpoint_commit_failure, Reason}
A minor nitpick here:
+ RepInfo = io_lib:format("replication `~s` (`~s` -> `~s`)",
+ [BaseId ++ Ext, Rep#rep_state.source_name, Rep#rep_state.target_name]),
+ ?LOG_ERROR("~s failed: ~p", [lists:flatten(RepInfo), Reason]),
You don't need to flatten. All the "io:format" family functions accept IOLists
for string place holders. Plus, the logger module is converting it to a binary
anyway (before sending it to the couch_log gen_event).
I attach here an alternative patch. Let me know what you think.
cheers
> fail fast with checkpoint conflicts
> -----------------------------------
>
> Key: COUCHDB-1080
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-1080
> Project: CouchDB
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Replication
> Affects Versions: 1.0.2
> Reporter: Randall Leeds
> Fix For: 1.1, 1.2
>
> Attachments: COUCHDB-1080-fdmanana.patch,
> paranoid_checkpoint_failure.patch, paranoid_checkpoint_failure_v2.patch
>
>
> I've thought about this long and hard and probably should have submitted the
> bug a long time ago. I've also run this in production for months.
> When a checkpoint conflict occurs it is almost always the right thing to do
> to abort.
> If there is a rev mismatch it could mean there's are two conflicting
> (continuous and one-shot) replications between the same hosts running.
> Without reloading the history documents checkpoints will continue to fail
> forever. This could leave us in a state with many replicated changes but no
> checkpoints.
> Similarly, a successful checkpoint but a lost/timed-out response could cause
> this situation.
> Since the supervisor will restart the replication anyway, I think it's safer
> to abort and retry.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
