On 10/26/2011 1:49 PM, Jeff Blaine wrote: > Would a "favor highest" patch be accepted if it was controlled > via configure script, defaulting to the traditional behavior?
I would object. A quorum requirement is that all servers are in agreement with the server configuration and the quorum algorithm. Any change to the quorum algorithm needs to be exposed as part of the negotiation in order for servers to not get into a state where a misconfigured server or a server executing with an alternate algorithm does not result in a failure to achieve quorum. One of the requirements for pushing patches upstream is that they must not cause people to hang themselves due to inadvertent use. Think about what you would need to do if you were running with this patch locally. Every sysadmin that upgrades these servers must remember that the patch is in place (or how the servers were built/configured) and not forget. If you leave tomorrow, is the next sysadmin going to be burned by this change when s/he attempts to install openafs distributed binaries in your cell? That is not to say that we don't need to improve things. We know we do and it has been talked about for nearly a decade. However, it is also hard and since it is hard it has repeatedly been put off. Jeffrey Altman
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
