SEZ9 commented on PR #11856: URL: https://github.com/apache/seatunnel/pull/11856#issuecomment-5747479000
Thanks for the detailed follow-up on `dc2c64103c`. **F1** – Moving the marker write out of `ManagedService.shutdown()` and onto the `LifecycleListener` path (`SHUTTING_DOWN` → `markLocalGracefulMemberRemoval()`) is the right fix for the PASSIVE-node problem, and having `ClusterFaultToleranceIT.testGracefulShutdownPublishesMemberRemovalMarker` drive it through two real members with `node1.shutdown()` is what I was asking for. Two things before I close this one: 1. As you note, the evidence from fork run `35240527669` is a class-level result for `ClusterFaultToleranceIT`, and the new test passing is an inference. Could you share per-method output (from CI or a local run of that single test) so we have direct confirmation? 2. You mention the SIGTERM / JVM shutdown-hook path is covered by reading the Hazelcast 5.1 sources rather than by a test. I'm fine not adding an IT for the hook itself, but please add a short comment near `markLocalGracefulMemberRemoval()` noting that the marker depends on `LifecycleServiceImpl.shutdown` firing `SHUTTING_DOWN` on the hook path, so the assumption is visible to whoever bumps Hazelcast next. **F4** – Your comment appears to have been cut off right after "Eviction is a Hazelcas…", so I only have the first sentence of the TTL-versus-timestamp explanation. Could you re-post the rest? In particular, how the TTL on the `put` and the `isGracefulMemberRemovalMarkerValid` timestamp check divide responsibility, and whether the timestamp check still depends on cross-node clock agreement. **F2, F3, F5, F6, F7, F8** – I don't see these addressed in this comment. If they were handled in `dc2c64103c`, a brief per-finding pointer is enough; otherwise please let me know which you intend to fix in this PR and which you'd rather defer, so we can converge on the remaining scope. <!-- streview-comment:1187 --> -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
