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 2018/06/09 07:40:00 UTC
[jira] [Updated] (SOLR-11216) Make PeerSync more robust
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-11216?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Cao Manh Dat updated SOLR-11216:
--------------------------------
Description:
First of all, I will change the issue's title with a better name when I have.
When digging into SOLR-10126. I found a case that can make peerSync fail.
* leader and replica receive update from 1 to 4
* replica stop
* replica miss updates 5, 6
* replica start recovery
## replica buffer updates 7, 8
## replica request versions from leader,
## in the same time leader receive update 9, so it will return updates from 1 to 9 (for request versions) when replica get recent versions ( so it will be 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 )
## replica do peersync and request updates 5, 6, 9 from leader
## replica apply updates 5, 6, 9. Its index does not have update 7, 8 and maxVersionSpecified for fingerprint is 9, therefore compare fingerprint will fail
My idea here is why replica request update 9 (step 6) while it knows that updates with lower version ( update 7, 8 ) are on its buffering tlog. Should we request only updates that lower than the lowest update in its buffering tlog ( < 7 )?
Someone my ask that what if replica won't receive update 9. In that case, leader will put the replica into LIR state, so replica will run recovery process again.
was:
First of all, I will change the issue's title with a better name when I have.
When digging into SOLR-10126. I found a case that can make peerSync fail.
* leader and replica receive update from 1 to 4
* replica stop
* replica miss updates 5, 6
* replica start recovery
## replica buffer updates 7, 8
## replica request versions from leader,
## replica get recent versions which is 1,2,3,4,7,8
## in the same time leader receive update 9, so it will return updates from 1 to 9 (for request versions)
## replica do peersync and request updates 5, 6, 9 from leader
## replica apply updates 5, 6, 9. Its index does not have update 7, 8 and maxVersionSpecified for fingerprint is 9, therefore compare fingerprint will fail
My idea here is why replica request update 9 (step 6) while it knows that updates with lower version ( update 7, 8 ) are on its buffering tlog. Should we request only updates that lower than the lowest update in its buffering tlog ( < 7 )?
Someone my ask that what if replica won't receive update 9. In that case, leader will put the replica into LIR state, so replica will run recovery process again.
> Make PeerSync more robust
> -------------------------
>
> Key: SOLR-11216
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-11216
> Project: Solr
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Security Level: Public(Default Security Level. Issues are Public)
> Reporter: Cao Manh Dat
> Priority: Major
>
> First of all, I will change the issue's title with a better name when I have.
> When digging into SOLR-10126. I found a case that can make peerSync fail.
> * leader and replica receive update from 1 to 4
> * replica stop
> * replica miss updates 5, 6
> * replica start recovery
> ## replica buffer updates 7, 8
> ## replica request versions from leader,
> ## in the same time leader receive update 9, so it will return updates from 1 to 9 (for request versions) when replica get recent versions ( so it will be 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 )
> ## replica do peersync and request updates 5, 6, 9 from leader
> ## replica apply updates 5, 6, 9. Its index does not have update 7, 8 and maxVersionSpecified for fingerprint is 9, therefore compare fingerprint will fail
> My idea here is why replica request update 9 (step 6) while it knows that updates with lower version ( update 7, 8 ) are on its buffering tlog. Should we request only updates that lower than the lowest update in its buffering tlog ( < 7 )?
> Someone my ask that what if replica won't receive update 9. In that case, leader will put the replica into LIR state, so replica will run recovery process again.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@lucene.apache.org