This repository has been archived by the owner on Sep 30, 2024. It is now read-only.
Maintainance lock cycle #420
Merged
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
shlomi-noach
temporarily deployed
to
production/mysql_cluster=conductor
|
Works well. |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Solves #407
This PR introduces:
in-maintenancecommand (and backing function) which tells if an instance is currently under maintenance.match-belowcommand (Pseudo-GTID relocate) requires that the target instance is not already under maintenance. This breaks the loop depicted in Prevent concurrent relocations on same pair of servers #407 without imposing new locks.cc @sjmudd