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

primary instance conversion docs ambiguous #1435

Open
anarcat opened this issue Feb 24, 2020 · 0 comments
Open

primary instance conversion docs ambiguous #1435

anarcat opened this issue Feb 24, 2020 · 0 comments

Comments

@anarcat
Copy link
Contributor

anarcat commented Feb 24, 2020

the primary instance conversion procedure in the evacuating node admin docs is ambiguous. it seems to say that, to evacuate a node, you first need to switch all the primary instances to their secondaries:

There are two steps of moving instances off a node:

  • moving the primary instances (actually converting them into secondary instances)
  • moving the secondary instances (including any instances converted in the step above)

Then it says:

For [the primary instance conversion] step, you can use either individual instance move commands (as seen in Changing the primary node) or the bulk per-node versions; these are:

$ gnt-node migrate NODE
$ gnt-node evacuate -s NODE

I read this as gnt-node migrate NODE and gnt-node evacuate -s NODE as being equivalent. But this is what gnt-node --help actually says:

    evacuate           - Relocate the primary and/or secondary instances from a node
    migrate            - Migrate all the primary instance on a node away from it

And digging a little deeper, in gnt-node evacuate --help, we see:

--secondary-only, -s    Evacuate secondary instances only (applies only to

Which means that this:

gnt-node migrate NODE

migrates all primary nodes away from the node, and this:

gnt-node evacuate -s NODE

will migrate all secondary isntances from a node.

Now, this seems like the opposite of each other. In any case, this documentation should be clarified.

Because I can't seem to have patches accepted in this community (see this discussion for the gory details) I am deliberately not providing a patch for this, so that some one else can actually fix this problem.

But the fix should be trivial enough that this shouldn't be necessary.

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

No branches or pull requests

1 participant