Thanks. You were right, I had a stale version of 479. Compilation
succeeds and all tests pass on branch-3.2 with the latest patches 473,
479, 481, and 491.

-Todd
 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Flavio Junqueira [mailto:f...@yahoo-inc.com]
> Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 7:48 PM
> To: zookeeper-user@hadoop.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Unending Leader Elections in WAN deploy
> 
> It should be in 479. Perhaps you have a stale version of the patch.
> 
> -Flavio
> 
> On Jul 31, 2009, at 7:46 PM, Todd Greenwood wrote:
> 
> > Flavio,
> >
> > I'm getting a compilation error for patch 491:
> >
> > compile-main:
> >    [javac] Compiling 1 source file to
> > /home/toddg/asi/workspaces/main/Main/RSI/etc/holmes/main/zookeeper/
> > src/p
> > atched/branch-3.2/build/classes
> >    [javac]
> > /home/toddg/asi/workspaces/main/Main/RSI/etc/holmes/main/zookeeper/
> > src/p
> > atched/branch-3.2/src/java/main/org/apache/zookeeper/server/quorum/
> > FastL
> > eaderElection.java:601: cannot find symbol
> >    [javac] symbol  : method getWeight(long)
> >    [javac] location: interface
> > org.apache.zookeeper.server.quorum.flexible.QuorumVerifier
> >    [javac]
> > if(self.getQuorumVerifier().getWeight(n.sid) != 0)
> >    [javac]                                                    ^
> >    [javac] 1 error
> >
> > I see a reference to getWeight in both FastLeaderElection.java in
> > patch
> > 491:
> >
> > patches/ZOOKEEPER-491.patch:+
> > if(self.getQuorumVerifier().getWeight(n.sid) != 0)
> > src/java/main/org/apache/zookeeper/server/quorum/
> > FastLeaderElection.java
> > :
> > if(self.getQuorumVerifier().getWeight(n.sid) !=
> > 0)
> >
> > However, I don't see a reference to this method in patches 473, 479,
> > or
> > 481. I also don't see a reference to this method in the trunk...
> >
> > -Todd
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Todd Greenwood [mailto:to...@audiencescience.com]
> >> Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 7:30 PM
> >> To: zookeeper-user@hadoop.apache.org
> >> Subject: RE: Unending Leader Elections in WAN deploy
> >>
> >> Ok, I'll apply that patch and report back.
> >> -Todd
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Flavio Junqueira [mailto:f...@yahoo-inc.com]
> >>> Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 7:18 PM
> >>> To: zookeeper-user@hadoop.apache.org
> >>> Subject: Re: Unending Leader Elections in WAN deploy
> >>>
> >>> You're missing 491 from your set of patches.
> >>>
> >>> -Flavio
> >>>
> >>> On Jul 31, 2009, at 7:15 PM, Todd Greenwood wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> This repro's in both branch-3.2, and branch-3.2+patches(473, 479,
> >>>> 481).
> >>>>
> >>>> Basically, it seems like the nodes are electing pd4-zook02 to be
> > the
> >>>> leader. However, pd4-zook02 seems to realize it's not supposed to
> > be
> >>>> and
> >>>> then disconnects everyone. Then they re-elect it again, and it
> > loops
> >>>> over and over.
> >>>>
> >>>> -------------
> >>>> Server config
> >>>> -------------
> >>>>
> >>>> server.1=dc1-zook01.dc01.revsci.net:2888:3888
> >>>> server.2=dc1-zook02.dc01.revsci.net:2888:3888
> >>>> server.3=dc1-zook03.dc01.revsci.net:2888:3888
> >>>> server.4=dc1-zook04.dc01.revsci.net:2888:3888
> >>>> server.5=dc1-zook05.dc01.revsci.net:2888:3888
> >>>> server.6=pd1-zook01.pd01.revsci.net:2888:3888
> >>>> server.7=pd1-zook02.pd01.revsci.net:2888:3888
> >>>> server.8=pd4-zook01.iad1.audsci.net:2888:3888
> >>>> server.9=pd4-zook02.iad1.audsci.net:2888:3888
> >>>>
> >>>> group.1:1:2:3:4:5
> >>>> weight.1=1
> >>>> weight.2=1
> >>>> weight.3=1
> >>>> weight.4=1
> >>>> weight.5=1
> >>>>
> >>>> group.2:6:7:8:9
> >>>> weight.6=0
> >>>> weight.7=0
> >>>> weight.8=0
> >>>> weight.9=0
> >>>>
> >>>> Note that we have 2 groups, composed of machines in 3 different
> >>>> locations (dc1, pd1, and pd4). The idea is that only machines in
> > dc1
> >>>> have voting rights, and the ability to become a leader. The
> > machines
> >>>> in
> >>>> the pods all have a weight of zero, and are not expected to
become
> >>>> leaders, or to vote on transactions.
> >>>>
> >>>> Let me know what I can do to help resolve this issue.
> >>>>
> >>>> -Todd
> >

Reply via email to