Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-996: Pre-Vote

Thank you Ziming, I guess it's misleading to say "Raft paper" when I'm actually referring to the extended version of the paper (Ongaro's PHD thesis). I have that version linked but I'll update the language to be more specific! On Wed, Feb 7, 2024 at 7:16 PM ziming deng wrote: > Hi Alyssa, > > I

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-996: Pre-Vote

Hi Alyssa, I have a minor question about the description in motivation section > Pre-Vote (as originally detailed in the Raft paper and in KIP-650) It seems Pre-vote is not mentioned in Raft paper, can you check out it again and rectify it? It would be helpful, thank you! - Thanks, Ziming

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-996: Pre-Vote

Hi Alyssa, Thanks for the update. LGTM now. Luke On Fri, Dec 8, 2023 at 10:03 AM José Armando García Sancio wrote: > Hi Alyssa, > > Thanks for the answers and the updates to the KIP. I took a look at > the latest version and it looks good to me. > > -- > -José >

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-996: Pre-Vote

Hi Alyssa, Thanks for the answers and the updates to the KIP. I took a look at the latest version and it looks good to me. -- -José

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-996: Pre-Vote

>From Jose - > 1. In the schema for VoteRequest and VoteResponse, you are using > "boolean" as the type keyword. The correct keyword should be "bool" > instead. > Thanks! > 2. In the states and state transaction table you have the following entry: > > * Candidate transitions to: > > *... >

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-996: Pre-Vote

>From Jun - > 10. "If a server happens to receive multiple VoteResponses from another > server for a particular VoteRequest, it can take the first and ignore the > rest.": Could you explain why a server would receive multiple responses for > the same request? > This was meant to be a coverall for

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-996: Pre-Vote

Hey folks, thanks for the reviews! Addressing them one by one. From Luke - Some comments: > 1. Follower transitions to: Prospective: After expiration of the election > timeout > -> Is this the fetch timeout, not election timeout? > Yes, thanks for this catch! > 2. I also agree we don't bump the

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-996: Pre-Vote

Hi Alyssa, 1. In the schema for VoteRequest and VoteResponse, you are using "boolean" as the type keyword. The correct keyword should be "bool" instead. 2. In the states and state transaction table you have the following entry: > * Candidate transitions to: > *... > *Prospective: After

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-996: Pre-Vote

Hi, Alyssa, Thanks for the KIP. A few comments below. 10. "If a server happens to receive multiple VoteResponses from another server for a particular VoteRequest, it can take the first and ignore the rest.": Could you explain why a server would receive multiple responses for the same request?

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-996: Pre-Vote

Hi Alyssa, Thanks for the KIP! This is an important improvement for KRaft quorum. Some comments: 1. Follower transitions to: Prospective: After expiration of the election timeout -> Is this the fetch timeout, not election timeout? 2. I also agree we don't bump the epoch in prospective state. A

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-996: Pre-Vote

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 wrote: > Hi Alyssa > > On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 1:40 PM Jason Gustafson > wrote: > > 2. Do you think the pretend epoch bump is necessary? Would it be simpler >

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-996: Pre-Vote

Hi Alyssa On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 1:40 PM Jason Gustafson 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

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-996: Pre-Vote

Hey Alyssa, Thanks for the response. I am not sure if `ProposedEpoch` is completely satisfying either. When the prevote flag is unset, the voters are expected to bump their own epoch when receiving the request. I think it makes the protocol a little simpler if the candidate epoch is always the

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-996: Pre-Vote

Thanks for the feedback Jason! 1. I might have missed it in the KIP, but could you clarify what happens > when a pre-vote fails (i.e. a majority of voters reject the potential > candidacy)? The transition descriptions only mention what happens if the > prospective leader learns of a higher epoch.

Re: [DISCUSS] KIP-996: Pre-Vote

Hey Alyssa, Thanks for the KIP! I have a couple questions: 1. I might have missed it in the KIP, but could you clarify what happens when a pre-vote fails (i.e. a majority of voters reject the potential candidacy)? The transition descriptions only mention what happens if the prospective leader

[DISCUSS] KIP-996: Pre-Vote

Hey folks, Starting a discussion thread for Pre-Vote design. Appreciate your comments in advance! https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-996%3A+Pre-Vote Best, Alyssa