I tried adding the backups to the list. But it was getting convoluted and over complex. I will skip it and keep it simple.
I have a PR open to avoid loop backs on the config. That part I did. On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 3:30 AM Miroslav Novak <[email protected]> wrote: > Hehe, thanks for introduction. :-) I admit, I joined the discussion to > help to make replicated journal more robust. This feature is doing that > already and thanks for implementing it. I'm happy that more people can > share their ideas and different approaches. > > You're right, adding backup as default would stop live server if no other > IP address would be provided to the check list and backup would be > killed/crashed. It's not possible to distinguish between network failure > and crash of remote participant. An IF check could be provided that list > contains at least one other IP address but this is getting over-engineered > which is against the original idea to have this simple. > > > I will add an option to add backups to network health check, but I > > won't do it by default. > > Ok, let's not do assumptions here. > > Thanks, > Mirek > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Clebert Suconic" <[email protected]> > > To: [email protected] > > Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 3:34:29 PM > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] ARTEMIS-863 - Network Health Check > > > > First, before I continue.. let me introduce Miroslav to everybody: > > > > Miroslav is a QA engineer at Red Hat for EAP, Messaging and so on, and > > to be fair.. he is one of the best I have ever worked with. He is > > really good on finding issues.. I have an internal joke that I'm > > always afraid when I see a JIRA opened by Mirek. so I really respect > > his opinion. > > > > It is great that we are having an open discussion here. and I welcome > > you to always be part of open discussions here at the dev list. > > > > > > So, back to the issue: > > > > I will add an option to add backups to network health check, but I > > won't do it by default. You won't always have ICMP open. and I won't > > add anything without a third address added. Because losing the backup > > would lose the whole live as well (in case of a power outage). > > > > The intent of the PING is to avoid network failures on the box. E.G.. > > If you pull the cable of the box. > > > > If you make weird routes to your system, then you are on purpose > > splitting your network in such way you don't have how to fix. You need > > redundant routes at the system... just like any other networking. (not > > to cut them) > > > > The user should know his topology and should always provide IPs that > > will be helpful on validating the network. The user also need to > > consider his network topology on the solution. > > > > On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 6:20 AM, Miroslav Novak <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Yes, this could be configurable. I would vote to have this enabled by > > > default as in case with replicated journal. This will prevent situation > > > where live and backup are active at the same time. I don't see use for > > > this feature in simple cluster. > > > > > > It seems that check list cannot contain IP to itself as such address > will > > > be always reachable. > > > > > > Mirek > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > >> From: "Clebert Suconic" <[email protected]> > > >> To: [email protected] > > >> Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2016 2:53:30 PM > > >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] ARTEMIS-863 - Network Health Check > > >> > > >> We can add a few properties to such to control add backup or add other > > >> members. > > >> > > >> I will think about something next week after the holiday. > > >> > > >> On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 3:18 AM Miroslav Novak <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >> > > >> > For this to work properly, the check list of IPs/hostnames must > contain > > >> > also live/backup pair. I mean that live should have in its > checklist IP > > >> > of > > >> > backup and backup of its live server. I think there is problem for > the > > >> > user > > >> > to manually add this to the "check list", especially if it's using > > >> > discovery - JGroups UDP or Netty UDP discovery - for finding > servers. > > >> > Can > > >> > IP/hostnames be added to the checklist automatically? Otherwise this > > >> > will > > >> > be very static. wdyt? > > >> > > > >> > Mirek > > >> > > > >> > ----- Original Message ----- > > >> > > From: "Clebert Suconic" <[email protected]> > > >> > > To: [email protected] > > >> > > Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2016 5:36:44 PM > > >> > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] ARTEMIS-863 - Network Health Check > > >> > > > > >> > > I changed the implementation to accept IPV6. > > >> > > > > >> > > Unfortunately, an IPV6 Address is not returning true through > > >> > > isReachable. Perhaps I really need root access fot the ICMP to > work on > > >> > > IPV6 address. > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > Anyway, I am testing for IPV6 and using ping6 now on my local > copy.. I > > >> > > will update the branch before the end of the day, and I should > send a > > >> > > PR. > > >> > > > > >> > > On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 11:25 AM, Matt Pavlovich < > [email protected]> > > >> > wrote: > > >> > > > On 11/22/16 9:14 AM, Clebert Suconic wrote: > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 10:04 AM, Matt Pavlovich > > >> > > >> <[email protected]> > > >> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >>> > > >> > > >>> Clebert- > > >> > > >>> > > >> > > >>> Can you clarify what you mean by: > > >> > > >>> > > >> > > >>> "..the server will shutdown.." > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> the Network Checker will call server.stop(); > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> The process will stay alive, waiting the network to come back, > when > > >> > > >> is > > >> > > >> back.. it will call server.start() again. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Good deal. Sounds good! > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > -- > > >> > > Clebert Suconic > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Clebert Suconic > > >
