You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@bigtop.apache.org by Pekkari <gi...@git.apache.org> on 2018/02/26 14:18:25 UTC

[GitHub] bigtop pull request #341: BIGTOP-3005 Add zkpeer-relation-changed hook to zo...

GitHub user Pekkari opened a pull request:

    https://github.com/apache/bigtop/pull/341

    BIGTOP-3005 Add zkpeer-relation-changed hook to zookeeper charm.

    Check quorum status and update config accordingly if zkpeer relation changes.
    
    This change add a zkpeer-relation-changed hook to refresh the configuration of
    the server.[\d] lines in zoo.cfg to match any new information received either through the
    relation manually, or from juju.
    
    Signed-off-by: José Pekkarinen <jo...@canonical.com>

You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

    $ git pull https://github.com/Pekkari/bigtop apache-bigtop-master

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

    https://github.com/apache/bigtop/pull/341.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

    This closes #341
    
----
commit d0790682702d54c2eb8bc655819fbdb3e1c3dde3
Author: José Pekkarinen <jo...@...>
Date:   2018-02-23T08:36:14Z

    Check quorum status and update config accordingly if zkpeer relation changes.
    
    Signed-off-by: José Pekkarinen <jo...@canonical.com>

----


---

[GitHub] bigtop issue #341: BIGTOP-3005 Add zkpeer-relation-changed hook to zookeeper...

Posted by Pekkari <gi...@git.apache.org>.
Github user Pekkari commented on the issue:

    https://github.com/apache/bigtop/pull/341
  
    I'm trying to ease the case where you have several spaces, and zookeeper was deployed in the wrong one. Nowadays, you can set the constraint in juju, and force departure and rejoin, or you can set the right value in the relation, and update manually the config files in every unit. This would allow you to set the value in the relationship, and get it propagated to the config automatically.


---

[GitHub] bigtop issue #341: BIGTOP-3005 Add zkpeer-relation-changed hook to zookeeper...

Posted by kwmonroe <gi...@git.apache.org>.
Github user kwmonroe commented on the issue:

    https://github.com/apache/bigtop/pull/341
  
    Rev 42 contains this update and has been released to the edge channel in the charm store:
    
    https://jujucharms.com/zookeeper/42
    
    Pending CI tests to move it through to stable.


---

[GitHub] bigtop issue #341: BIGTOP-3005 Add zkpeer-relation-changed hook to zookeeper...

Posted by PikkuJose <gi...@git.apache.org>.
Github user PikkuJose commented on the issue:

    https://github.com/apache/bigtop/pull/341
  
    I'm trying to ease the case where you have several spaces, and zookeeper was deployed in the wrong one. Nowadays, you can set the constraint in juju, and force departure and rejoin, or you can set the right value in the relation, and update manually the config files in every unit. This would allow you to set the value in the relationship, and get it propagated to the config automatically.


---

[GitHub] bigtop issue #341: BIGTOP-3005 Add zkpeer-relation-changed hook to zookeeper...

Posted by kwmonroe <gi...@git.apache.org>.
Github user kwmonroe commented on the issue:

    https://github.com/apache/bigtop/pull/341
  
    +1, thx for the explanation @Pekkari.  A quick deploy with this addition lgtm.


---

[GitHub] bigtop pull request #341: BIGTOP-3005 Add zkpeer-relation-changed hook to zo...

Posted by asfgit <gi...@git.apache.org>.
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:

    https://github.com/apache/bigtop/pull/341


---

[GitHub] bigtop issue #341: BIGTOP-3005 Add zkpeer-relation-changed hook to zookeeper...

Posted by kwmonroe <gi...@git.apache.org>.
Github user kwmonroe commented on the issue:

    https://github.com/apache/bigtop/pull/341
  
    @Pekkari I don't understand what a `zkpeer.changed` handler buys us given that we already run a `check_cluster` when peers join and depart.  Am I missing a case where a peer would change that is not covered by join/depart?


---