You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
As the amount of nodes increases, f increases, so the likelihood of having nodes that are unreachable/crashed increases as well.
The leader ID is currently calculated as the index of the node in the position v % n when v is the view ID and n is the node count.
Due to the way we calculate this leader ID, the leader ID might change when we do a reconfiguration that adds or removes nodes.
If we change the leader ID but this node might be offline/unreachable at that time, it means that doing a reconfiguration might cause downtime (view change).
To circumvent this problem, I propose that we persist the leader ID in the view metadata, and:
Increment modulo n this leader ID when we do a view change
Persist this leader ID, when we do a reconfiguration, unless the leader itself is removed, and in that case we just pick the next leader ID.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
As the amount of nodes increases, f increases, so the likelihood of having nodes that are unreachable/crashed increases as well.
The leader ID is currently calculated as the index of the node in the position v % n when v is the view ID and n is the node count.
Due to the way we calculate this leader ID, the leader ID might change when we do a reconfiguration that adds or removes nodes.
If we change the leader ID but this node might be offline/unreachable at that time, it means that doing a reconfiguration might cause downtime (view change).
To circumvent this problem, I propose that we persist the leader ID in the view metadata, and:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: