> On April 18, 2014, 12:46 a.m., Ben Mahler wrote: > > src/log/recover.cpp, lines 239-240 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/18600/diff/10/?file=561411#file561411line239> > > > > Maybe a good TODO would be on the Log interface? I'm curious why we > > would allow the 'quorum' to be specified explicitly when constructing a Log > > with a set of pids. Are there reasons for having larger than necessary > > quorum sizes? > > > > We don't seem to be validating the quorum size is large enough w.r.t > > 'pids'?
> I'm curious why we would allow the 'quorum' to be specified explicitly > when constructing a Log with a set of pids. Are there reasons for > having larger than necessary quorum sizes? Technically, quorum size does not necessarily has to be "floor(cluster size/2) + 1". For example, one may wanna choose to use quorum == cluster size in some cases (for high redundancy). > On April 18, 2014, 12:46 a.m., Ben Mahler wrote: > > src/log/recover.cpp, line 325 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/18600/diff/10/?file=561411#file561411line325> > > > > Do we want to chain this new run behind 'future' transitioning from > > pending or is it safe to proceed immediately with the new protocol run? Re-wrote it after the 'select' bug has been fixed in https://reviews.apache.org/r/20533/ > On April 18, 2014, 12:46 a.m., Ben Mahler wrote: > > src/tests/log_tests.cpp, lines 1749-1751 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/18600/diff/10/?file=561412#file561412line1749> > > > > We have macros to do this in one line if you like: > > > > AWAIT_EQ > > AWAIT_ASSERT_EQ > > AWAIT_EXPECT_EQ > > > > Ditto elsewhere. You'll gonna need AWAIT_EXPECT_SOME_EQ(...). Will just leave it for now. > On April 18, 2014, 12:46 a.m., Ben Mahler wrote: > > src/log/recover.cpp, line 349 > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/18600/diff/9-10/?file=549174#file549174line349> > > > > 10 Seconds seems like quite a lot when we expect operators to start > > replicas sequentially? What would be the consequences of a lower timeout? We'll just retry more frequently. I'll keep 10 seconds for now (to be consistent with the catchup retry timeout) unless it becomes a problem. - Jie ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/18600/#review40724 ----------------------------------------------------------- On April 16, 2014, 11:43 p.m., Jie Yu wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/18600/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated April 16, 2014, 11:43 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Benjamin Hindman and Ben Mahler. > > > Bugs: MESOS-984 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-984 > > > Repository: mesos-git > > > Description > ------- > > See summary. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/log/log.hpp 6787c80 > src/log/log.cpp 9dd992f > src/log/recover.hpp 634bc06 > src/log/recover.cpp 688da5f > src/tests/log_tests.cpp 4f08927 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/18600/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > make check > > > Thanks, > > Jie Yu > >
