Hi Santi, as long as the new state model definition is compatible with the old one, your approach should be fine. I've added a test for this.
On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Santiago Perez <[email protected]> wrote: > Participants are already running with code that supports new state > transitions. > > Also all states currently in CURRENT_STATES are in both models. > > > On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 6:29 PM, Shi Lu <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Santi: >> >> For your updated statemodel, does it involve adding new state transitions? >> >> If yes then the helix participant will need to be updated as well, since >> they need to implement the new added state transitions. If not then the >> participant will not be able to process the updated state transition >> messages and most likely will go into error state. >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Santiago Perez <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > Hi, >> > >> > I need to redefine a state model on a live cluster and would like to >> know >> > the recommended (safe) way to do so. >> > >> > My current plan was to do the fololwing: >> > >> > 1) Stop all controllers >> > 2) Remove the node from STATEMODELDEFS >> > 3) Run code that will rewrite the state model >> > 4) Start controllers again >> > >> > I'm assuming that only controllers load the state models, but I may be >> > mistaken. >> > >> > Please advice. >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Santiago >> > >> > >
