Hi Phil,
> Now you're allowed to make changes... meaning the node that was removed > from the cluster now has a flow that is no longer in-sync with the cluster > and you have to remove that node's flow before it's able to rejoin the > cluster. Was this intentional? I know there are a lot of things coming > down the pipe with Nifi 2.0 but looking to understand the thought process > behind this... > This is not completely correct. The node should be able to rejoin the cluster and NiFi will automatically apply the flow changes to the rejoining cluster so that the flow definition is in-sync again across the cluster. This is definitely intentional to provide a better user experience and not switch to read-only when a node is disconnected. Note that there are cases where the node would not be able to rejoin the cluster in order to not cause any unwanted data loss: for example if a connection is deleted in the cluster, and there is data in this connection when the node tries to rejoin the cluster, we would not delete the data. I'm sure others can provide more details, but I also recommend watching Mark's video on this topic: https://youtu.be/8G6niPKntTc?t=709 Thanks, Pierre Le mar. 14 mars 2023 à 14:46, Phillip Lord <[email protected]> a écrit : > Nifi Guardians, > > Can someone explain the motivation behind the somewhat recent change(I > believe 1.17ish) that now allows users to make canvas changes to a cluster > that is missing a node. For instance a cluster that is normally 3/3 is for > whtvr reason now 2/3. Previously you would get a warning and you were > unable to make changes to the 2/3 clustered canvas. Which certainly > prevents future headaches. > > Now you're allowed to make changes... meaning the node that was removed > from the cluster now has a flow that is no longer in-sync with the cluster > and you have to remove that node's flow before it's able to rejoin the > cluster. Was this intentional? I know there are a lot of things coming > down the pipe with Nifi 2.0 but looking to understand the thought process > behind this... > > Thanks, > Phil >
