[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2080?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15494073#comment-15494073
]
Michael Han commented on ZOOKEEPER-2080:
----------------------------------------
bq. The server will remain in the looking state, which will force it to try
again. Do you agree?
Yes, the explanation makes sense to me. Previously I was not sure about this as
I was concerning if skipping this will cause the following {{setCurrentVote}}
fail, but now it looks like everything will converge.
bq. I think this is the case I'm mentioning above, but let me know.
Agreed.
bq. A refactor of this code makes perfect sense to me.
Out of scope of this JIRA, but notes are taken :)
> ReconfigRecoveryTest fails intermittently
> -----------------------------------------
>
> Key: ZOOKEEPER-2080
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2080
> Project: ZooKeeper
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Reporter: Ted Yu
> Assignee: Michael Han
> Fix For: 3.5.3, 3.6.0
>
> Attachments: ZOOKEEPER-2080.patch, ZOOKEEPER-2080.patch,
> ZOOKEEPER-2080.patch, ZOOKEEPER-2080.patch, ZOOKEEPER-2080.patch,
> jacoco-ZOOKEEPER-2080.unzip-grows-to-70MB.7z, repro-20150816.log,
> threaddump.log
>
>
> I got the following test failure on MacBook with trunk code:
> {code}
> Testcase: testCurrentObserverIsParticipantInNewConfig took 93.628 sec
> FAILED
> waiting for server 2 being up
> junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: waiting for server 2 being up
> at
> org.apache.zookeeper.server.quorum.ReconfigRecoveryTest.testCurrentObserverIsParticipantInNewConfig(ReconfigRecoveryTest.java:529)
> at
> org.apache.zookeeper.JUnit4ZKTestRunner$LoggedInvokeMethod.evaluate(JUnit4ZKTestRunner.java:52)
> {code}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
