I will send the JIRAs of the bug which we thought we have fixed but it still
exists.
Have you done any correctness testing after doing all these tests...have you
done the tests for 1000 instance clusters?
It is great you have done these tests and I am hoping the gossiping snitch is
good.
Here are some of the JIRAs which are fixed but actually did not fix the
issue. We have tried fixing this by several patches. May be it will be
fixed when Gossip is rewritten(CASSANDRA-12345). I should find or create a
new JIRA as this issue still exists.
Sorry, maybe my spam filter got them or something, but I have never seen a JIRA
number mentioned in the thread before this one. Just looked back through again
to make sure, and this is the first email I have with one.
-Jeremiah
> On Oct 22, 2018, at 9:37 PM, sankalp kohli wrote:
>
> Here
No worries...I mentioned the issue not the JIRA number
> On Oct 22, 2018, at 8:01 PM, Jeremiah D Jordan wrote:
>
> Sorry, maybe my spam filter got them or something, but I have never seen a
> JIRA number mentioned in the thread before this one. Just looked back
> through again to make sure,
If you guys are still seeing the problem, would be good to have a JIRA written
up, as all the ones linked were fixed in 2017 and 2015. CASSANDRA-13700 was
found during our testing, and we haven’t seen any other issues since fixing it.
-Jeremiah
> On Oct 22, 2018, at 10:12 PM, Sankalp Kohli
Do you have a specific gossip bug that you have seen recently which caused a
problem that would make this happen? Do you have a specific JIRA in mind? “We
can’t remove this because what if there is a bug” doesn’t seem like a good
enough reason to me. If that was a reason we would never make
On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 7:09 PM J. D. Jordan
wrote:
> Do you have a specific gossip bug that you have seen recently which caused
> a problem that would make this happen? Do you have a specific JIRA in mind?
Sankalp linked a few others, but also
+1 to fallback and like I said before removing PFS is a good idea as long it is
safe
> On Oct 22, 2018, at 7:41 PM, Jeff Jirsa wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 7:09 PM J. D. Jordan
> wrote:
>
>> Do you have a specific gossip bug that you have seen recently which caused
>> a problem that
> the new host won’t learn about the host whose status is missing and the
view of this host will be wrong.
Won't this happen even with PropertyFileSnitch as the token(s) for this
host will be missing from gossip/system.peers?
Em sáb, 20 de out de 2018 às 00:34, Sankalp Kohli
escreveu:
> Say
Yes it will happen. I am worried that same way DC or rack info can go
missing.
On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 12:52 PM Paulo Motta
wrote:
> > the new host won’t learn about the host whose status is missing and the
> view of this host will be wrong.
>
> Won't this happen even with PropertyFileSnitch as
I can understand keeping PFS for historical/compatibility reasons, but if
gossip is broken I think you will have similar ring view problems during
replace/bootstrap that would still occur with the use of PFS (such as
missing tokens, since those are propagated via gossip), so that doesn't
seem like
We will have similar issues with Gossip but this will create more issues as
more things will be relied on Gossip.
I agree PFS should be removed but I dont see how it can be with issues like
these or someone proves that it wont cause any issues.
On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 2:21 PM Paulo Motta
wrote:
12 matches
Mail list logo
