Hi Ted, Mahadev is in the best position to comment (he looked at it last)
but iirc when we started looking into implementing this we immediately ran
into so big questions. One was what to do if the logs had been cleaned up
and the individual transactions no longer available. This could be overcome
EOS means that the client closed the connection (from the point of view of
the server). The server then tries to cleanup by closing the socket
explicitly, in some cases that results in debug messages you see subsequent.
EndOfStreamException: Unable to
read additional data from client sessionid 0x0
Hi Ted, Mahadev is in the best position to comment (he looked at it last)
but iirc when we started looking into implementing this we immediately ran
into so big questions. One was what to do if the logs had been cleaned up
and the individual transactions no longer available. This could be overcome
Sounds like it might be a bug, was this just for the root or for any znode?
Please file a JIRA, thanks.
Patrick
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 1:01 PM, Fournier, Camille F. [Tech] <
camille.fourn...@gs.com> wrote:
> The ZK documentation says:
> New in 3.2: Enables a ZooKeeper ensemble administrator to
I'm not aware of sustained 1k/sec, Ben might know how long the 20k/sec test
runs for (and for how long that rate is sustained). You'd definitely want to
tune the GC, GC related pauses would be the biggest obstacle for this
(assuming you are using a dedicated log device for the transaction logs).
P
Already did. I think it's for any znode, given the way the bug presents.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-904
I have a test and fix for this (described in the tracker), if you agree this is
a bug I will attach it.
C
-Original Message-
From: Patrick Hunt [mailto:ph...@apac
These corner cases are relatively rare, I would think (I personally keep
logs around for days or longer).
Would it be possible to get a partial solution in place that invokes the
current behavior if logs aren't available?
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 10:42 AM, Patrick Hunt wrote:
> Hi Ted, Mahadev i
