Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Ignore RequestVote when leader is established. #58

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 11, 2018

Conversation

yossigo
Copy link
Contributor

@yossigo yossigo commented Mar 7, 2018

This behavior is described in the original Raft paper and is required to
prevent removed nodes from disrupting the cluster.

This causes other problems though, as a split node may trigger election
which is rejected but leaves it with a future term. The generally
accepted solution for this appears to be the use of PreVote RPC to avoid
election that can never succeed.

This behavior is described in the original Raft paper and is required to
prevent removed nodes from disrupting the cluster.

This causes other problems though, as a split node may trigger election
which is rejected but leaves it with a future term.  The generally
accepted solution for this appears to be the use of PreVote RPC to avoid
election that can never succeed.
@willemt willemt merged commit ab96a76 into willemt:master Jun 11, 2018
@willemt
Copy link
Owner

willemt commented Jun 11, 2018

Thanks! It's great to get this one covered off

@yossigo
Copy link
Contributor Author

yossigo commented Jun 11, 2018

@willemt I think it may be a good idea to leave an open issue to explore the PreVote topic (see above), as this is an immediate but not a complete fix.

@willemt
Copy link
Owner

willemt commented Jun 11, 2018

ok, it would be a good addition: #78

liw referenced this pull request in daos-stack/raft Feb 9, 2021
This behavior is described in the original Raft paper and is required to
prevent removed nodes from disrupting the cluster.

This causes other problems though, as a split node may trigger election
which is rejected but leaves it with a future term.  The generally
accepted solution for this appears to be the use of PreVote RPC to avoid
election that can never succeed.

Signed-off-by: Li Wei <wei.g.li@intel.com>
liw referenced this pull request in daos-stack/raft Feb 9, 2021
This behavior is described in the original Raft paper and is required to
prevent removed nodes from disrupting the cluster.

This causes other problems though, as a split node may trigger election
which is rejected but leaves it with a future term.  The generally
accepted solution for this appears to be the use of PreVote RPC to avoid
election that can never succeed.

Signed-off-by: Li Wei <wei.g.li@intel.com>
liw referenced this pull request in daos-stack/raft Feb 18, 2021
This behavior is described in the original Raft paper and is required to
prevent removed nodes from disrupting the cluster.

This causes other problems though, as a split node may trigger election
which is rejected but leaves it with a future term.  The generally
accepted solution for this appears to be the use of PreVote RPC to avoid
election that can never succeed.

Signed-off-by: Li Wei <wei.g.li@intel.com>
liw referenced this pull request in daos-stack/raft Feb 18, 2021
This behavior is described in the original Raft paper and is required to
prevent removed nodes from disrupting the cluster.

This causes other problems though, as a split node may trigger election
which is rejected but leaves it with a future term.  The generally
accepted solution for this appears to be the use of PreVote RPC to avoid
election that can never succeed.

Signed-off-by: Li Wei <wei.g.li@intel.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants