Improving storage-engine handling #186
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR changes the way the storage engine is selected.
In 3.4, the
rocksdbstorage engine will be default, while in 3.3, this ismmfiles.With this PR the default value for the
--server.storage-enginehas changed frommmfilesto an empty string. During bootstrapping it will be decided which storage engine will actually be used.The /hello protocol has been extended to include a ServerStorageEngine field such that when a starter joins an existing cluster, it will adopt the storage engine that is already in use by the rest of the cluster.