[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BOOKKEEPER-420?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13507911#comment-13507911 ]
Ivan Kelly commented on BOOKKEEPER-420: --------------------------------------- [~rakeshr] Can I resolve this issue as a "Won't Fix", or do you think this is still something we need to address? > Lock does not guarantee any access order and not giving chance to > longest-waiting RW > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Key: BOOKKEEPER-420 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BOOKKEEPER-420 > Project: Bookkeeper > Issue Type: Sub-task > Components: bookkeeper-auto-recovery > Reporter: Rakesh R > Assignee: Rakesh R > Fix For: 4.2.0 > > > Improve the distributed lock by giving fair chance to all the RW. Presently > few RW can again and again acquire lock and pushing other RW away from > rereplication. > +Example:+ > Have five RWs...RW1, RW2, RW3, RW4, RW5. > Say L0000000004 is underreplicated and RW1 acquired lock. Meantime all others > will add watcher to this lock. After replication assume RW2 acquired lock and > all others(including RW1) will be adding watcher. Here after RW2 releases, > again RW1 can be more aggressive and acquire the lock. This will push others > to starvation. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira