Hi Isuru, I have done some changes to the Member Lifecycle and also added events:
Things changed: - I have introduced a new state called Inactive. Currently we detect members as Inactive but it is not reflected in topology, rather we straightway consider those as Faulty members and terminate them. May be we can split the member faulty timeout into two parts and first detect them as Inactive and then after the second timeout consider them as Faulty and terminate. In this way there is a buffer time for the members to come back to Active state. WDYT? - I have renamed "Activated" to "Active" since we introduced Inactive state. - I have renamed "In Maintenance" to "Pre Terminate" because "In Maintenance" would not mean that the member is about to be terminated. Please add your thoughts. Thanks On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 5:38 PM, Isuru Haththotuwa <isu...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi all, > > I do agree that there might be many changes that we need for this state > diagram. That will need to be developed as we go on. The idea is to discuss > the use of validating state changes, for any state diagram that we come > upon. > > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 3:09 PM, Udara Liyanage <ud...@wso2.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Could you mention what events/actions causes the state transition from >> Activate to Terminate? >> >> My next question is what happens when member diapered when it is in >> In-Maintaince mode? Does this state transition is applicable to obsolete >> members also. >> >> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Chamila De Alwis <chami...@wso2.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> In the container based scenario, aren't the members immediately >>> terminated without going in to the maintenance mode? >>> >>> >>> Regards, >>> Chamila de Alwis >>> Software Engineer | WSO2 | +94772207163 >>> Blog: code.chamiladealwis.com >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Manula Chathurika Thantriwatte < >>> manu...@wso2.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Isuru, >>>> >>>> IMO is we need to verify the life cycle in between Activated and >>>> Terminated modes. We not need to verify the created and started, because >>>> without started members want come to activated state. >>>> >>>> Thanks ! >>>> >>>> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 12:46 PM, Isuru Haththotuwa <isu...@apache.org> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Devs, >>>>> >>>>> The purpose of this thread is to discuss $subject. >>>>> >>>>> Currently, even though the topology elements (Members, Clusters, etc) >>>>> go through a life cycle, we do not validate the transitions. For an >>>>> example, a Member can have the following life cycle: >>>>> >>>>> [image: Inline image 1] >>>>> >>>>> IMHO its important to keep track of the transitions and see if the >>>>> change of state is valid as well. >>>>> Ex. A member can't go from Created state to Activated state without >>>>> passing through the Started state. If there is such a thing, it might mean >>>>> that the member is in an inconsistent state. Therefore, we need to >>>>> validate >>>>> this transitions. >>>>> >>>>> Thoughts? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Thanks and Regards, >>>>> >>>>> Isuru H. >>>>> +94 716 358 048* <http://wso2.com/>* >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Regards, >>>> Manula Chathurika Thantriwatte >>>> Software Engineer >>>> WSO2 Inc. : http://wso2.com >>>> lean . enterprise . middleware >>>> >>>> email : manu...@wso2.com / man...@apache.org >>>> phone : +94 772492511 >>>> blog : http://manulachathurika.blogspot.com/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> >> Udara Liyanage >> Software Engineer >> WSO2, Inc.: http://wso2.com >> lean. enterprise. middleware >> >> web: http://udaraliyanage.wordpress.com >> phone: +94 71 443 6897 >> >> -- >> Thanks and Regards, >> >> Isuru H. >> +94 716 358 048* <http://wso2.com/>* >> >> >> * <http://wso2.com/>* >> >> >> -- Imesh Gunaratne Technical Lead, WSO2 Committer & PMC Member, Apache Stratos
