thanks Mark. looking forward it
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 9:28 AM, Mark Miller wrote:
> Looks like we are talking about making a release candidate next week.
>
> Mark
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jan 10, 2013, at 7:50 PM, Zeng Lames wrote:
>
> > thanks Mark. may I know the target release date
Looks like we are talking about making a release candidate next week.
Mark
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 10, 2013, at 7:50 PM, Zeng Lames wrote:
> thanks Mark. may I know the target release date of 4.1?
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 10:13 PM, Mark Miller wrote:
>
>> It may still be related.
thanks Mark. may I know the target release date of 4.1?
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 10:13 PM, Mark Miller wrote:
> It may still be related. Even a non empty index can have no versions (eg
> one that was just replicated). Should behave better in this case in 4.1.
>
> - Mark
>
> On Jan 10, 2013, at 1
It may still be related. Even a non empty index can have no versions (eg one
that was just replicated). Should behave better in this case in 4.1.
- Mark
On Jan 10, 2013, at 12:41 AM, Zeng Lames wrote:
> thanks Mark. will further dig into the logs. there is another problem
> related.
>
> we ha
thanks Mark. will further dig into the logs. there is another problem
related.
we have collections with 3 shards (2 nodes in one shard), the collection
have about 1000 records in it. but unfortunately that after the leader is
down, replica node failed to become the leader.the detail is : after the
It may be able to do that because it's forwarding requests to other nodes that
are up?
Would be good to dig into the logs to see if you can narrow in on the reason
for the recovery_failed.
- Mark
On Jan 9, 2013, at 8:52 PM, Zeng Lames wrote:
> Hi ,
>
> we meet below strange case in producti
