dcapwell commented on code in PR #3842:
URL: https://github.com/apache/cassandra/pull/3842#discussion_r1934249831
##########
src/java/org/apache/cassandra/service/accord/AccordService.java:
##########
@@ -377,24 +371,33 @@ public synchronized void startup()
node.commandStores().restoreShardStateUnsafe(topology ->
configService.reportTopology(topology, true, true));
configService.start();
- long minEpoch = fetchMinEpoch();
- if (minEpoch >= 0)
+ try
{
- for (long epoch = minEpoch; epoch <= metadata.epoch.getEpoch();
epoch++)
- node.configService().fetchTopologyForEpoch(epoch);
+ // Fetch topologies up to current
+ List<Topology> topologies = fetchTopologies(0, metadata);
+ for (Topology topology : topologies)
+ configService.reportTopology(topology);
- try
- {
-
epochReady(metadata.epoch).get(DatabaseDescriptor.getTransactionTimeout(MILLISECONDS),
MILLISECONDS);
- }
- catch (InterruptedException e)
- {
- throw new UncheckedInterruptedException(e);
- }
- catch (ExecutionException | TimeoutException e)
+
ClusterMetadataService.instance().log().addListener(configService.listener);
+ ClusterMetadata next = ClusterMetadata.current();
+
+ // if metadata was updated before we were able to add a listener,
fetch remaining topologies
+ if (metadata != next)
Review Comment:
when i think about this this feels currently safe, but feels off... if for
some reason in the future, if TCM ever recreates the `ClusterMetadata` object,
then this logic breaks; should we just check the epochs don't match instead?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: pr-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: pr-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: pr-h...@cassandra.apache.org
