[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2193?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14597834#comment-14597834
]
Raul Gutierrez Segales commented on ZOOKEEPER-2193:
---------------------------------------------------
[~shralex], [~Yasuhito Fukuda]: Sorry, one last thing. I think there might be
an issue in assuming unique IDs:
{code}
+ // check duplication of addresses and ports
+ for (QuorumServer nqs: nextServers.values()) {
+ if (qs.id == nqs.id) {
+ continue;
+ }
+ qs.checkAddressDuplicate(nqs);
+ }
{code}
Is in it valid for Observers to have their id set to -1? In that case, the
check wouldn't be performed. Could we add a test case for that?
> reconfig command completes even if parameter is wrong obviously
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ZOOKEEPER-2193
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2193
> Project: ZooKeeper
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: leaderElection, server
> Affects Versions: 3.5.0
> Environment: CentOS7 + Java7
> Reporter: Yasuhito Fukuda
> Assignee: Yasuhito Fukuda
> Attachments: ZOOKEEPER-2193-v2.patch, ZOOKEEPER-2193-v3.patch,
> ZOOKEEPER-2193-v4.patch, ZOOKEEPER-2193-v5.patch, ZOOKEEPER-2193-v6.patch,
> ZOOKEEPER-2193-v7.patch, ZOOKEEPER-2193-v8.patch, ZOOKEEPER-2193.patch
>
>
> Even if reconfig parameter is wrong, it was confirmed to complete.
> refer to the following.
> - Ensemble consists of four nodes
> {noformat}
> [zk: vm-101:2181(CONNECTED) 0] config
> server.1=192.168.100.101:2888:3888:participant
> server.2=192.168.100.102:2888:3888:participant
> server.3=192.168.100.103:2888:3888:participant
> server.4=192.168.100.104:2888:3888:participant
> version=100000000
> {noformat}
> - add node by reconfig command
> {noformat}
> [zk: vm-101:2181(CONNECTED) 9] reconfig -add
> server.5=192.168.100.104:2888:3888:participant;0.0.0.0:2181
> Committed new configuration:
> server.1=192.168.100.101:2888:3888:participant
> server.2=192.168.100.102:2888:3888:participant
> server.3=192.168.100.103:2888:3888:participant
> server.4=192.168.100.104:2888:3888:participant
> server.5=192.168.100.104:2888:3888:participant;0.0.0.0:2181
> version=300000007
> {noformat}
> server.4 and server.5 of the IP address is a duplicate.
> In this state, reader election will not work properly.
> Besides, it is assumed an ensemble will be undesirable state.
> I think that need a parameter validation when reconfig.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
