[jira] [Commented] (CASSANDRA-2434) range movements can violate consistency

["Nick Bailey (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-2434?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13104701#comment-13104701 ] 

Nick Bailey commented on CASSANDRA-2434:
----------------------------------------

My comment wasn't very clear. Both decom and move currently, attempt to do the right thing. When a node is leaving, there should be one new replica for all the ranges it is responsible for. If it can't stream data to that replica there is a consistency problem.

Both operations currently try to do stream to that replica, but we should use the 'strict' logic in those cases as well and fail if we can't guarantee consistency and the user hasn't disabled strict.

> range movements can violate consistency
> ---------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-2434
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-2434
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Peter Schuller
>            Assignee: paul cannon
>             Fix For: 1.0.1
>
>         Attachments: 2434-3.patch.txt, 2434-testery.patch.txt
>
>
> My reading (a while ago) of the code indicates that there is no logic involved during bootstrapping that avoids consistency level violations. If I recall correctly it just grabs neighbors that are currently up.
> There are at least two issues I have with this behavior:
> * If I have a cluster where I have applications relying on QUORUM with RF=3, and bootstrapping complete based on only one node, I have just violated the supposedly guaranteed consistency semantics of the cluster.
> * Nodes can flap up and down at any time, so even if a human takes care to look at which nodes are up and things about it carefully before bootstrapping, there's no guarantee.
> A complication is that not only does it depend on use-case where this is an issue (if all you ever do you do at CL.ONE, it's fine); even in a cluster which is otherwise used for QUORUM operations you may wish to accept less-than-quorum nodes during bootstrap in various emergency situations.
> A potential easy fix is to have bootstrap take an argument which is the number of hosts to bootstrap from, or to assume QUORUM if none is given.
> (A related concern is bootstrapping across data centers. You may *want* to bootstrap to a local node and then do a repair to avoid sending loads of data across DC:s while still achieving consistency. Or even if you don't care about the consistency issues, I don't think there is currently a way to bootstrap from local nodes only.)
> Thoughts?

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira