Thanks Jose, I've updated the KIP to reflect your and Jason's suggestions! On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 9:54 AM José Armando García Sancio <jsan...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote:
> Hi Alyssa > > On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 1:40 PM Jason Gustafson > <ja...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote: > > 2. Do you think the pretend epoch bump is necessary? Would it be simpler > to > > change the prevote acceptance check to assert a greater than or equal > epoch? > > I agree with Jason it would be better if all of the requests always > sent the current epoch. For the VoterRequest, it should be correct for > the prospective node to not increase the epoch and send the current > epoch and id. Since there are two states (prospective and candidate) > that can send a VoteRequest, maybe we can change the field name to > just ReplicaEpoch and ReplicaId. > > Thanks, > -- > -José >
