Benjamin,

Yes i have seen this when adding a new node into the cluster.  the new node
doesnt see the complete ring through nodetool, but the strange part is that
looking at the ring through jconsole shows the complete ring.  it as if
there is a big in nodetool publishing the actual ring.  has anyone seen that
scenario.  while in this situation is does appear that the cluster is
functioning correctly with replicating data, just cant trust nodetools ring
information.


Artie

2010/6/30 Benjamin Black <b...@b3k.us>

> Does this happen after you have changed the ring topology, especially
> adding nodes?
>
> 2010/6/30 Stephen Hamer <stephen.ha...@xobni.com>:
> > When this happens to me I have to do a full cluster restart. Even doing a
> > rolling restart across the cluster doesn't seem to fix them, all of the
> > nodes need to be stopped at the same time. After bringing everything back
> up
> > the ring is correct.
> >
> >
> >
> > Does anyone know how a cluster gets into this state?
> >
> >
> >
> > Stephen
> >
> >
> >
> > From: aaron morton [mailto:aa...@thelastpickle.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2010 1:42 PM
> > To: user@cassandra.apache.org
> > Cc: 'huzhonghua'; 'GongJianTao(宫建涛)'
> > Subject: Re: live nodes list in ring
> >
> >
> >
> > At start up do you see log lines like this
> >
> >
> >
> > Gossiper.java (line 576) Node /192.168.34.30 is now part of the cluster
> >
> >
> >
> > Are all the nodes listed?
> >
> >
> >
> > aaron
> >
> > On 30 Jun 2010, at 22:50, 王一锋 wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> >
> > In a cassandra cluster, when issueing ring command on every nodes, some
> can
> > show all nodes in the cluster but some can only show some other nodes.
> >
> > All nodes share the same seed list.
> >
> > And even some of the nodes in the seed list have this problem.
> >
> > Restarting the problematic nodes won't solve it.
> >
> > Try closing firewalls with following commands
> >
> >
> >
> > service iptables stop
> >
> >
> >
> > Still won't work.
> >
> >
> >
> > Anyone got a clue?
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks very much.
> >
> >
> >
> > Yifeng
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to