On 3/17/26 14:25, Gordan Bobic wrote:
If you lose/partition majority of nodes, then yes, you can definitely lose transactions. Galera never guaranteed that all nodes will be in sync before acknowledging, only the majority of nodes, and only if the minority of nodes fail / partition simultaneously.
Er, as the report notes, MariaDB goes to significant length to say the opposite. Take, for example, https://mariadb.com/docs/galera-cluster/galera-cluster-quickstart-guides/mariadb-galera-cluster-replication-guide
"Unlike traditional asynchronous or semi-synchronous replication, Galera ensures that transactions are committed on all nodes (or fail on all) before the client receives a success confirmation. This mechanism eliminates data loss and minimizes replica lag, making all nodes active and capable of handling read and write operations."
Obviously the docs are lying about this, haha, but still! More pragmatically, this is kind of table stakes for any system that wants to claim SI. The first-committer-wins principle is a consensus problem, and consensus systems famously have to be careful about fsyncing to disk, writing to quorums, and carefully picking leaders to prevent this kind of scenario.
That is more concerning, but are you sure this was tested from a clean starting point? If the data was not 100% in sync to begin with, then I can see a few possibility how this could manifest as follow-up damage (e.g. due to foreign key constraints)
Fairly confident, yes! Every test runs with a fresh set of data files and a freshly bootstrapped cluster.
Sincerely, --Kyle _______________________________________________ discuss mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
