node not part of the cluster is not allowed to vote #477
@mkeeler I was thinking about this after our conversation today and I noticed few things:
Let me know what you think about this?
So from our original discussions I was thinking the upgrade process would look like:
So with that sort of flow it wouldn't break compatibility. However I think I prefer your approach of adding the id to the
I wonder whether we should add both the address and id of the peer server to the
Thank you for taking a look at this @mkeeler
About the upgrade process, I was thinking the same. I just called it a breaking change from the perspective that it need a special upgrade flow (2 restarts).
About removing the
…luster before granting a vote
…` and `Leader` in version > 3
There was a problem hiding this comment.