primary stepdown on reconfig isn't needed in some cases

XMLWordPrintableJSON

    • Type: Bug
    • Resolution: Duplicate
    • Priority: Major - P3
    • None
    • Affects Version/s: None
    • Component/s: Replication
    • Minor Change
    • ALL
    • None
    • 3
    • None
    • None
    • None
    • None
    • None
    • None
    • None

      ... which leads to connections being broken unnecessarily.

      One such case - if a majority of members are unchanged and the primary is one of the unchanged members. Ex: one secondary node out of a three-node replica set goes bad and we want to replace it with another good node. If that node being down doesn't require a stepdown, then the node changing shouldn't either?

              Assignee:
              Spencer Brody (Inactive)
              Reporter:
              Greg Studer (Inactive)
              Votes:
              9 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              10 Start watching this issue

                Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved: