Raul,

I'd need some time to dig into ZK-832, but from the description I don't think 
it is a blocker. As I understand this is happening because the server lost 
persistent state, and this is isn't a common scenario in a replicated 
deployment. I'm fine with downgrading it from blocker to major/critical. 

As for ZK-1029, if we know what the problem is, would be difficult to provide a 
patch? 

-Flavio

> On 22 Oct 2015, at 21:57, Raúl Gutiérrez Segalés <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> On 5 October 2015 at 11:01, Raúl Gutiérrez Segalés <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>>
> wrote:
> 
>> On 8 September 2015 at 23:15, Raúl Gutiérrez Segalés <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> On 23 August 2015 at 14:51, Raúl Gutiérrez Segalés <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On 23 August 2015 at 14:44, Raúl Gutiérrez Segalés <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>> 
>>>>> sorry about dropping the ball here. So going over the unresolved
>>>>> issues, I think these ones would be nice to tackle before cutting an RC:
>>>>> 
>>>>> * ZOOKEEPER-1833: fix windows build (one sub-task still opened:
>>>>> ZOOKEEPER-1868)
>>>>> * ZOOKEEPER-1029: C client bug in zookeeper_init (if bad hostname is
>>>>> given)
>>>>>  (no one has this assigned, I'll try to get a patch out by tomorrow)
>>>>> * ZOOKEEPER-832: Invalid session id causes infinite loop during
>>>>> automatic reconnect
>>>>>  (I've asked Rakesh if can wrap it up, if anyone else can help that
>>>>> would be great)
>>>>> * ZOOKEEPER-2033: zookeeper follower fails to start after a restart
>>>>> immediately following a new epoch
>>>>>  (pinged Flavio to get some feedback)
>>>>> 
>>>>> Everything else can probably be punted for 3.4.8, unless anyone
>>>>> disagrees.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> One more, which needs to be back-ported from trunk:
>>>> 
>>>> ZOOKEEPER-1506:  Re-try DNS hostname -> IP resolution if node connection
>>>> fails
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> There's been some movement in the bug tracker, but ZOOKEEPER-1506 and 
>>> ZOOKEEPER-832
>>> still need reviews (hopefully tomorrow, unless someone can beat me to it)
>>> and I still need to get to ZOOKEEPER-1029.
>>> 
>> 
>> So ZOOKEEPER-1506 is done. Still waiting on ZOOKEEPER-832 and I am hoping
>> to finally get to ZOOKEEPER-1029 this week (unless someone beats me to it,
>> which would be much appreciated).
>> 
> 
> 
> Circling back, it turns out that  ZOOKEEPER-1029 is actually not the cause
> for MESOS-2186. The fact that we are not properly checking if the locks
> have been initialized before trying to get the locks is still wrong, but
> ignoring the return codes from pthread_cond_broadcast and
> pthread_mutex_lock (EINVAL) is not causing the reported crashers.
> 
> I propose we punt ZOOKEEPER-1029 and ZOOKEEPER-832 for 3.4.8, so that we
> can keep moving with the release candidate.
> 
> Any objections?
> 
> 
> -rgs

Reply via email to