HA State: ensure not this and another instance can be responsible #825
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
In theory, this should not happen. This assumption is based on the trust in the database transaction performing the HA realization logic. However, one debugged log let one assume that this happened anyway. This change mostly signals an error while also explicitly giving up the HA state. Doing so should at least alarm a person reading the logs.
oxzi
force-pushed
the
ha-state-both-responsible-reject
branch
from
90c366b
to
a38491a
Compare
|
For the record, this behavior was seen in the linked ticket a short time after something in the database cluster went south. Furthermore, I have rebased the branch to reflect the latest changes on the main 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
In theory, this should not happen. This assumption is based on the trust in the database transaction performing the HA realization logic. However, one debugged log let one assume that this happened anyway.
This change mostly signals an error while also explicitly giving up the HA state. Doing so should at least alarm a person reading the logs.
ref/IP/55850