+1 for consistency. There is one caveat: destroy region command, e.g. is executing the function on all members that have the region, but the function is calling a distributed method (region.destroy()) which will be propagated to other members. So if the "destroy" is successful on one member, the command is deemed successful. How do we handle this case? Pick only one member to execute the command or still iterate on all members, but report truthfully on what happened on each member?
On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 8:29 AM, Michael William Dodge <mdo...@pivotal.io> wrote: > +1 for consistency! > > Sarge > > > On 31 Oct, 2017, at 07:59, Jens Deppe <jensde...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I've noticed that various commands, that execute on multiple members, > > return either tabulated results (one line per member - for example > > CreateRegionCommand) or a single pass/fail line. In the latter case it’s > > possible that information would get lost. For example if a command fails > on > > multiple members (but not all) then the user would not have complete > > insight into where the failure occurred. > > > > I'd like to propose that if a command executes on multiple members it > > should always return and display all the results. Alternatively, if the > > command succeeds then it should simply indicate success, however if it > > fails (even partially) it should return a full list of each member and > the > > result of the command on each of the members. > > > > Thoughts; comments? > > > > --Jens > > -- Cheers Jinmei
