[SERVER-15199] moveChunk fails to complete after replSetReconfig Created: 10/Sep/14 Updated: 10/Dec/14 Resolved: 15/Sep/14 |
|
| Status: | Closed |
| Project: | Core Server |
| Component/s: | Replication, Sharding |
| Affects Version/s: | 2.7.6 |
| Fix Version/s: | None |
| Type: | Bug | Priority: | Major - P3 |
| Reporter: | Jonathan Abrahams | Assignee: | Randolph Tan |
| Resolution: | Done | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | 28qa | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||||
| Issue Links: |
|
||||||||
| Operating System: | ALL | ||||||||
| Steps To Reproduce: | The test is attached along with the log output. Basic steps are as follows:
Note: value of secondaryThrottle (true or false) does not affect behavior |
||||||||
| Participants: | |||||||||
| Description |
|
The moveChunk command fails to complete after a replSetReconfig is issued on the toShard. |
| Comments |
| Comment by Randolph Tan [ 15/Sep/14 ] | |||||||||||||||||
|
Just talked with Jonathan offline. It looks like the issue being reported is that moveChunk still waits for the slave delayed secondaries even if secondaryThrottle was false. This is expected behavior since the shard will wait for majority of nodes to catch up at the end of the migration. The purpose of the secondaryThrottle is for deliberately slowing the migration process by waiting for replication for each individual writes instead of waiting after a bulk of the writes are executed. Also edited the comment for the original ticket ( | |||||||||||||||||
| Comment by Jonathan Abrahams [ 15/Sep/14 ] | |||||||||||||||||
|
renctan How long did your test run? When I run it under 2.7.6, the moveChunk command did not complete (within 5 minutes). What OS are you running it on? I am using OSX. | |||||||||||||||||
| Comment by Randolph Tan [ 15/Sep/14 ] | |||||||||||||||||
|
jonathan.abrahams I am having a hard time finding the error from the attached log. I however, able to make the attached test fail on 2.7.6. I want to make sure if this is the same as the issue you reported:
Thanks! |