Hi Sam! Just in case the question is still relevant, you can join tomorrow's Q&A session[1] to reach Ignite developers with this question.
Cheers, Kseniya [1] https://www.meetup.com/Apache-Ignite-Virtual-Meetup/events/273921637/ пт, 11 сент. 2020 г. в 17:37, sue <samuel.uelts...@bsi-software.com>: > Hi > > I've been testing Ignite (2.8.1) and it's behaviour under network > segmentation. > According to the docs, Ignite nodes should be able to detect network > segmentation and apply the configured SegmentationPolicy. > > However the segmentation handling didn't trigger as I would have expected > it > to do. > For my tests, I setup three cluster nodes c1, c2 and c3 running in docker > containers, all competing for a shared IgniteLock instance in a loop. > Then I used iptables in container c2 to drop all incoming and outgoing > packages on that node. > After a few seconds I got the following events: > > c1: > - EVT_NODE_FAILED for c2 > > c2: > - EVT_NODE_FAILED for c1 > - EVT_NODE_FAILED for c3 > > c3: > - EVT_NODE_FAILED for c2 > > Then I reset the iptables rules expecting that c2 would rejoin the cluster > and detect segmentation. > However this didn't happen, c2 just keeps running as a second standalone > cluster instance. > Only after restarting c2 it rejoined the cluster. > > Eventyally I was able to trigger the EVT_NODE_SEGMENTED event by pausing > the > c2 container for 1minute. After resuming, c2 detects the segmentation and > runs the segmentation policy as excepcted. > > Is this behaviour correct? Shouldn't the Ignite cluster be able to recover > from the first scenario? > During a network segmentation no packages would be able to move between > nodes, so the iptables approach should be realistic in my oppinion. > > Maybe I have some wrong assumptions about network segmentation so any > feedback would be greatly appreciated. > > Cheers Sam > > > > > > -- > Sent from: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/ >