lient?
>
> Thanks !!
>
>
>
>
> bit1...@163.com
>
> From: Ibrahim
> Date: 2015-01-07 08:38
> To: zookeeper-user
> Subject: RE: Question about the two-phrase commit
> Thank you Alexander. I get it
>
> Ibrahim
>
> From: Alexander Shraer-2 [via zookeep
ite has successfully done. what will A tell the client?
Thanks !!
bit1...@163.com
From: Ibrahim
Date: 2015-01-07 08:38
To: zookeeper-user
Subject: RE: Question about the two-phrase commit
Thank you Alexander. I get it
Ibrahim
From: Alexander Shraer-2 [via zookeeper-user]
[mailto:ml-n
Thank you Alexander. I get it
Ibrahim
From: Alexander Shraer-2 [via zookeeper-user]
[mailto:ml-node+s578899n7580745...@n2.nabble.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2015 12:29 ص
To: Ibrahim El-sanosi (PGR)
Subject: Re: Question about the two-phrase commit
Edward is totally right - if the
be only your second case is correct, unless the node
> that has latest transaction crashes forever.
>
> Ibrahim
> From: Edward Carter [via zookeeper-user] [mailto:
> ml-node+s578899n7580741...@n2.nabble.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2015 11:53 م
> To: Ibrahim El-sanosi (
580741...@n2.nabble.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2015 11:53 م
To: Ibrahim El-sanosi (PGR)
Subject: Re: Question about the two-phrase commit
If an operation is logged to disk on a minority of servers, then what happens
on restart depends on which server wins the leader election. Since t
.
Ibrahim
From: Edward Carter [via zookeeper-user]
[mailto:ml-node+s578899n7580741...@n2.nabble.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2015 11:53 م
To: Ibrahim El-sanosi (PGR)
Subject: Re: Question about the two-phrase commit
If an operation is logged to disk on a minority of servers, then what happens
.
Which one of both statement is correct?
Thank you
Ibrahim
From: Alexander Shraer-2 [via zookeeper-user]
[mailto:ml-node+s578899n7580740...@n2.nabble.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2015 11:51 م
To: Ibrahim El-sanosi (PGR)
Subject: Re: Question about the two-phrase commit
Yes, if the
If an operation is logged to disk on a minority of servers, then what happens
on restart depends on which server wins the leader election. Since the new
operation is on a minority, depending on network conditions, a server that did
*not* log the operation might win the leader election. In this
Yes, if the leader has this operation in its log (not guaranteed if it
wasn't acked by majority in previous ensemble, but possible), the leader
will make sure that a quorum of followers in the new ensemble has this
operation before doing anything else in the new ensemble.
Alex
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015
Hi Alexander,
So, you meant that if there is operation loged to the disk but it hasn't got
enough majority, then if the zookeeper servers restart, the new leader will
re-broadcast the loged operation again to the followers to commit that
operation.
Does above what you meant by (NEWLEADER message
When the leader is established there is a consensus decision on the start
state of the ensemble (NEWLEADER message acts as the accept and UPTODATE
message acts as commit). So all operations in the leader's log are acked by
a quorum at that stage.
Alex
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Ibrahim
wro
Hi folks,
This is really intersting post. It leads me to become more and more
confitable about Zab implementation.
I just want to make sure in bit1129 second scanario "2. A,B,C starts first
Assume A is the leader since it has more recent transaction id, then the
whole quorum will have this write
ill have the write. Is this the expected behavior?
>> I don't think so because 1 and 2 are conflicting. In 1, A's write is
>> inaccessible,but in 2, A's write is accessible.
>>
>> Is there something that I miss? Thanks.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
's write is
> inaccessible,but in 2, A's write is accessible.
>
> Is there something that I miss? Thanks.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> bit1...@163.com
>
> From: Alexander Shraer
> Date: 2015-01-06 13:26
> To: user@zookeeper.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Que
Subject: RE: Question about the two-phrase commit
Hi,
In your case only A and E has committed the latest transaction say am calling
it as txid=1000. B, C, D servers are down at this time and doesn't have the
changes of txid=1000.
Also, when restarting B,C,D the servers A, E are not avai
27;s write is accessible.
Is there something that I miss? Thanks.
bit1...@163.com
From: Alexander Shraer
Date: 2015-01-06 13:26
To: user@zookeeper.apache.org
Subject: Re: Question about the two-phrase commit
Hi,
A few things are not accurate. First, ZooKeeper implements consensus on
each opera
ults like this.
>
>
> Best Regards,
> Rakesh
> -Original Message-
> From: bit1...@163.com [mailto:bit1...@163.com]
> Sent: 05 January 2015 15:56
> To: user@zookeeper.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Question about the two-phrase commit
>
> Could someone help on this ques
Hi,
A few things are not accurate. First, ZooKeeper implements consensus on
each operation, not 2 phase commit.
There are differences in the definition and guaratees of 2PC and Consensus.
> 2. Followers ack the proposal and writes the change to the disk(but not
persisted yet?)
Before acking a fo
y 2015 15:56
To: user@zookeeper.apache.org
Subject: Re: Question about the two-phrase commit
Could someone help on this question? Thanks.
bit1...@163.com
From: bit1...@163.com
Date: 2015-01-05 15:05
To: user@zookeeper.apache.org
Subject: Question about the two-phrase commit
Hi,Zookeepers,
I
Could someone help on this question? Thanks.
bit1...@163.com
From: bit1...@163.com
Date: 2015-01-05 15:05
To: user@zookeeper.apache.org
Subject: Question about the two-phrase commit
Hi,Zookeepers,
I got a question about the two phrase commit in Zookeeper. When a write
operation happens
1.
20 matches
Mail list logo
