You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@zookeeper.apache.org by "Michael Han (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2017/03/13 16:22:10 UTC

[jira] [Updated] (ZOOKEEPER-933) Remove wildcard QuorumPeer.OBSERVER_ID

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-933?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Michael Han updated ZOOKEEPER-933:
----------------------------------
    Fix Version/s:     (was: 3.5.3)
                   3.5.4

> Remove wildcard  QuorumPeer.OBSERVER_ID
> ---------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: ZOOKEEPER-933
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-933
>             Project: ZooKeeper
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>            Reporter: Vishal Kher
>             Fix For: 3.5.4, 3.6.0
>
>
> 1. I have a question about the following piece of code in QCM:
> if (remoteSid == QuorumPeer.OBSERVER_ID) {
>  /* * Choose identifier at random. We need a value to identify * the connection. */ 
> remoteSid = observerCounter--;
> LOG.info("Setting arbitrary identifier to observer: " + remoteSid); 
> }
> Should we allow this? The problem with this code is that if a peer
> connects twice with QuorumPeer.OBSERVER_ID, we will end up creating
> threads for this peer twice. This could result in redundant
> SendWorker/RecvWorker threads.
> I haven't used observers yet. The documentation
> http://hadoop.apache.org/zookeeper/docs/r3.3.0/zookeeperObservers.html
> says that just like followers, observers should have server IDs. In
> which case, why do we want to provide a wild-card?



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)