Consider making the configuration and the server logs available somewhere so
that we can have a look.
-Flavio
On Tuesday, October 28, 2014 4:29 PM, Ibrahim
<[email protected]> wrote:
Hi bit1129,
I went back to my cluster to run it again to monitor and confirm your
thought. Unfortunately your answer wasn't what I have seen.
Assume we have servers 1,2,3,4, and 5. I tried the following tests:
Run1: If the start order is 1,2,3,4,5, then server 2 is elected.
Run2: If the start order is 2,1,3,4,5, then server 2 is elected.
Run3: If the start order is 3,2,1,4,5, then server 2 is elected.
Run4: If the start order is 3,1,2,4,5, then server 2 is elected.
Run5: If the start order is 1,2,4,3,5, then server 2 is elected.
Run6: If the start order is 1,2,5,3,4, then server 2 is elected.
-
-
You see, whatever the start order is, always server 2 is elected. Except if
the server 2 is not one of the three first starter servers. For example, If
the start order is 1,3,4,2,5, then server 2 will not elect as leader. I
understand that because the leader will elect as soon as we have a quorum
(at least 3 server).
Thank you
Ibrahim
--
View this message in context:
http://zookeeper-user.578899.n2.nabble.com/Strange-behaviour-in-Leader-election-tp7580475p7580483.html
Sent from the zookeeper-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
