Thank you for reviewing this Marton! The --upgrade flag is needed for the OM since it needs to be brought out of "prepared" state after an upgrade.
Right now, there is no need to prepare an SCM, and hence support has not been added for that. Hence, there is no --upgrade flag while starting SCM. SCM HA is compatible with upgrades in the code level. However, we need to add support to finalize a SCM HA cluster, which can happen only in a subsequent release (in this release, SCM HA cannot be enabled without finalization). We are planning to make the scm finalizeupgrade command 'HA aware' before the end of this release (to be used from the next release). Will create a JIRA for that soon. The fix to handle failures in Upgrade Action (HDDS-5118) is very simple and should be merged in a week. Also, there are no upgrade actions right now other than the simple SCM HA validation check action. We will work on getting out the simple fixes for HDDS-5137 and HDDS-5138 as well. On Thu, Apr 22, 2021 at 2:11 AM Elek, Marton <e...@apache.org> wrote: > > +1 thanks the work to al the contributors. > > I am very excited to have this feature as it is required by EC (and some > other related task). I am looking forward to try it out. > > I didn't have time to check the code deeply, but what I have seen > earlier about the annotation based approach, is very exciting. > > I have two technical questions: > > > 1. Is the branch compatible with scm-ha? It's not clear for me why do > I need to use --upgrade and --downgrade for OM but not for SCM... > > > 2. Which commit is proposed to be merged? For example the reported > HDDS-5118 seems to be blocker for me (but I also found HDDS-5137 and > HDDS-5138 during my testing. But I can be wrong). > > Thanks, > Marton > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ozone.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ozone.apache.org > > -- Thanks & Regards, Aravindan
