On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 9:12 AM, Yakov Zhdanov <[email protected]> wrote:
> Dmitry, > > This will not solve the problem: > > 1. new primary election may be affinity function dependent > Yes, of course. > 2. If you want to introduce order in updating backup copies then you lose > parallelism. This will increase ops latency. > I did not mean waiting till an update is finished. I suggested waiting an ask for the message is received. In my view, this will significantly reduce the possibility of out-of-sync data. > > My suggestion should not affect current performance on stable and on > unstable topologies. > > Btw, I have just got an idea - if we need to rebalance partition to more > than 1 node then we need to scan it only once. I believe now we do it each > time from very beginning. > I am not sure what this really means, but you should file a ticket for it with a proper description. D.
