]
Bela Ban commented on JGRP-1910:
--------------------------------
You lost me here. Can you give a concrete example ? The current algorithm tries to use
something akin to a Lamport time as view-id and discards views with view-id <= to the
current view-id.
MERGE3: Do not lose any members from view during a series of merges
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Key: JGRP-1910
URL:
https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JGRP-1910
Project: JGroups
Issue Type: Bug
Reporter: Radim Vansa
Assignee: Bela Ban
Fix For: 3.6.3
Attachments: SplitMergeFailFastTest.java, SplitMergeTest.java
When connection between nodes is re-established, MERGE3 should merge the cluster
together. This often does not involve a single MergeView but a series of such events. The
problematic property of this protocol is that some of those views can lack certain
members, though these are reachable.
This causes problem in Infinispan since the cache cannot be fully rebalanced before
another merge arrives, and all owners of certain segment can be gradually removed (and
added again) to the view, while this is not detected as partition but crashed nodes ->
losing all owners means data loss.
Removing members from view should be the role of FDx protocols, not MERGEx.