Thanks Ben! I think that we can take care of this issue by either examining the version present in 'MasterInfo', or by introducing a new master capability.
So, no need for constrained upgrades after all. Cheers, Greg On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 5:48 PM, Benjamin Mahler <bmah...@apache.org> wrote: > -user > > Do you have a link to the technical details of why this needs to be done? > > For instance, why can't master/agent versions be used to determine which > behavior is performed between the master and agent? > > On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 5:34 PM, Greg Mann <g...@mesosphere.io> wrote: > > > Hi all, > > We are currently working on patches to implement the new GROW_VOLUME and > > SHRINK_VOLUME operations . In order to make it into Mesos 1.6, we're > > pursuing a workaround which affects the way these operations are > accounted > > for in the Mesos master. These operations will be marked as > *experimental* in > > Mesos 1.6. > > > > As a result of this workaround, upgrades from Mesos 1.6 to later versions > > would be affected. Specifically, 1.6 masters would not be able to > properly > > account for the resources of failed GROW/SHRINK operations on 1.7+ > agents. > > This means that when upgrading from Mesos 1.6, if GROW_VOLUME or > > SHRINK_VOLUME operations are being used during the upgrade, the masters > > *must* be upgraded first. If we follow this proposal, this constraint > > would be clearly spelled out in our upgrade documentation. > > > > Since, in general, we guarantee compatibility between Mesos masters and > > agents of the same major version, we wanted to check with the community > to > > see if this constraint on 1.6 upgrades would be acceptable. Please let us > > know what you think! > > > > Cheers, > > Greg > > > > > >  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-4965 > > >