[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1529?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14042284#comment-14042284
]
Tobias Weingartner commented on MESOS-1529:
-------------------------------------------
I don't think that #2 is an option. We may be able to add extra
information/messages to let the frameworks know that something has been lost
"potentially", and allow the frameworks to choose which side of CAP they land
on. With the current assumptions and implementation, I believe that modifying
#2 would be a mistake.
> Handle a network partition between Master and Slave
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MESOS-1529
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-1529
> Project: Mesos
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Dominic Hamon
>
> If a network partition occurs between a Master and Slave, the Master will
> remove the Slave (as it fails health check) and mark the tasks being run
> there as LOST. However, the Slave is not aware that it has been removed so
> the tasks will continue to run.
> (To clarify a little bit: neither the master nor the slave receives 'exited'
> event, indicating that the connection between the master and slave is not
> closed).
> There are at least two possible approaches to solving this issue:
> 1. Introduce a health check from Slave to Master so they have a consistent
> view of a network partition. We may still see this issue should a one-way
> connection error occur.
> 2. Be less aggressive about marking tasks and Slaves as lost. Wait until the
> Slave reappears and reconcile then. We'd still need to mark Slaves and tasks
> as potentially lost (zombie state) but maybe the Scheduler can make a more
> intelligent decision.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
