Hi, lan Addressing issue also due to some changes recently and was fixed just after when 2.7.1 was released.
Now i have checked our internal branch based on older master but newer than 2.7.1 that has no issue currently. best regards, Jason > On Jun 3, 2019, at 14:21, Ian Luo <ian....@gmail.com> wrote: > > Jason > > >> And the reason generating the internal branch is that the address >> fetching logic is not correct in release 2.7.1 > > > Have this fixed in 2.7.2 too? > > Maybe we could introduce several RC versions before release so we have some >> time to take it to production environments mixed together. > > > This is really a good idea, to give users a chance to evaluate if it's > stable enough to deploy the new version into production environment. We > will consider it. > > Thanks, > -Ian. > > > > On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 2:05 PM Jason Joo <hblz...@163.com> wrote: > >> Hi, lan >> >> I have checked that day and found our internal branch was base on master >> newer than the release. >> And the reason generating the internal branch is that the address fetching >> logic is not correct in release 2.7.1 (Surely the static registration is >> another problem). So we escape from this issue fortunately. >> >> And again i think we should pay more attention no either unit tests and >> backward compatibility carefully with kinds of issue before: >> >> Attachments support issue(compatibility issue) on 2.5.8 >> qos.enable issue 2.6.x >> Maybe we could introduce several RC versions before release so we have >> some time to take it to production environments mixed together. >> >> >> best regards, >> >> Jason >> >>> On Jun 3, 2019, at 13:45, Ian Luo <ian....@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Jason, >>> >>> Sorry for introducing this severe regression. Pls. hold until 2.7.2 >>> releases which is expected to be public available in this week. We are >> now >>> considering to init a regression test project. Again, sorry about it. >>> >>> -Ian. >>> >>> On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 11:50 AM Jason Joo <hblz...@163.com> wrote: >>> >>>> hi, jun >>>> >>>> Long time not focus on dubbo but this news surprises me. I just upgraded >>>> some new spring-boot projects to use a new internal branch based on >> 2.7.1. >>>> >>>> I think it maybe better to describe how to trigger it in the notes? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> best regards, >>>> >>>> Jason >>>> >>>>> On May 31, 2019, at 11:39, Jun Liu <liu...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi, All >>>>> >>>>> Recently, we keep receiving issues from the community reporting >>>> duplicate URL addresses in Registry, mostly zookeeper, after upgrading >> to >>>> 2.7.1. Those URLs are all pushed to the Consumer and because only one of >>>> the duplicated URLs is valid, it causes the consumer to fail when the >>>> consumer chooses the invalid one during load balance. >>>>> >>>>> So I am thinking of add the following warning notes on top of 2.7.1 >>>> release notes[1] to warn users of the possible risks before our release >> of >>>> 2.7.2. >>>>> >>>>> —————— >>>>> Warning: According to reports from the community, be aware of possible >>>> Service Discovery problems in certain circumstances. Check #4213 for >>>> details. >>>>> >>>> >> 风险提示：升级到2.7.1版本后注册中心（多数是zookeeper）会出现重复URL地址数据无法删除，导致消费方拿到的是失效地址，从而导致调用失败的问题，2.7.2版本里面会修复此问题，预计6月初发布。详细原因请参考#4213。 >>>>> >>>>> Jun >>>> >>>> >> >>
