You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@lucene.apache.org by "Cao Manh Dat (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2017/11/30 07:17:00 UTC

[jira] [Comment Edited] (SOLR-11458) Bugs in MoveReplicaCmd handling of failures

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-11458?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16272262#comment-16272262 ] 

Cao Manh Dat edited comment on SOLR-11458 at 11/30/17 7:16 AM:
---------------------------------------------------------------

This bug relates to HDFS lease recovery. When data dir of a replica (core_node7 in this case) get deleted and get recovered when a new collection of the same name gets created.

[~markrmiller@gmail.com] : for newly created core, should we skip lease recovery??



was (Author: caomanhdat):
This bug relates to HDFS lease recovery. When data dir of a replica (core_node7 in this case) get deleted and get recovered when a new collection of the same name gets created.

@markrmiller@gmail.com : for newly created core, should we skip lease recovery??


> Bugs in MoveReplicaCmd handling of failures
> -------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SOLR-11458
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-11458
>             Project: Solr
>          Issue Type: Bug
>      Security Level: Public(Default Security Level. Issues are Public) 
>    Affects Versions: 7.0, 7.0.1, 7.1, master (8.0)
>            Reporter: Andrzej Bialecki 
>            Assignee: Andrzej Bialecki 
>
> Spin-off from SOLR-11449:
> {quote}
> There's a section of code in moveNormalReplica that ensures that we don't lose a shard leader during move. There's no corresponding protection in moveHdfsReplica, which means that moving a replica that is also a shard leader may potentially lead to data loss (eg. when replicationFactor=1).
> Also, there's no rollback strategy when moveHdfsReplica partially fails, unlike in moveNormalReplica where the code simply skips deleting the original replica - it seems that the code should attempt to restore the original replica in this case? When RF=1 and such failure occurs then not restoring the original replica means lost shard.
> {quote}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org