Have not chance to read this thread carefully, but a following
discussion sounds very similar and might be somehow useful [1].
[1]
http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/Partition-Loss-Policies-issues-td37304.html
Best regards,
Ivan Pavlukhin
чт, 7 мая 2020 г. в 11:36, Alexei
Yes, it will work this way.
чт, 7 мая 2020 г. в 10:43, Anton Vinogradov :
> Seems I got the vision, thanks.
> There should be only 2 ways to reset lost partition: to gain an owner from
> resurrected first or to remove ex-owner from baseline (partition will be
> rearranged).
> And we should make
Seems I got the vision, thanks.
There should be only 2 ways to reset lost partition: to gain an owner from
resurrected first or to remove ex-owner from baseline (partition will be
rearranged).
And we should make a decision for every lost partition before calling the
reset.
On Wed, May 6, 2020 at
ср, 6 мая 2020 г. в 12:54, Anton Vinogradov :
> Alexei,
>
> 1,2,4,5 - looks good to me, no objections here.
>
> >> 3. Lost state is impossible to reset if a topology doesn't have at least
> >> one owner for each lost partition.
>
> Do you mean that, according to your example, where
> >> a node2
Alexei,
1,2,4,5 - looks good to me, no objections here.
>> 3. Lost state is impossible to reset if a topology doesn't have at least
>> one owner for each lost partition.
Do you mean that, according to your example, where
>> a node2 has left, soon a node3 has left. If the node2 is returned to
>>
Folks,
I've almost finished a patch bringing some improvements to the data loss
handling code, and I wish to discuss proposed changes with the community
before submitting.
*The issue*
During the grid's lifetime, it's possible to get into a situation when some
data nodes have failed or
