[BACKPORT] Fix re-execution of completed task when killing the owner node #10010
Conversation
This file contains 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
|
Test PASSed. |
vbekiaris
approved these changes
Mar 3, 2017
tkountis
force-pushed
the
fix/3.8.1/durable_executor_skip_reexecution_on_node_kill
branch
from
0d05a59
to
291856d
Compare
|
Test PASSed. |
gurbuzali
approved these changes
Mar 6, 2017
tkountis
deleted the
fix/3.8.1/durable_executor_skip_reexecution_on_node_kill
branch
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
When a task is submitted to a key owner, and the task completes, we replace the runnable
with the result in the internal ring buffer. However, there is no backup-operation to sync
the result with the backup nodes. If the node shuts down gracefully then the replication
will properly handle it, but when the node is killed, the backup nodes still have the task
in their ring-buffer rather than the result, thus, we re-execute it.
Fix #9965