[SERVER-4259] must a failure of applyOperation_inlock() be handled in ApplyOpsCmd? Created: 11/Nov/11 Updated: 11/Jul/16 Resolved: 13/Feb/12 |
|
| Status: | Closed |
| Project: | Core Server |
| Component/s: | Replication |
| Affects Version/s: | None |
| Fix Version/s: | 2.1.1 |
| Type: | Bug | Priority: | Major - P3 |
| Reporter: | Dwight Merriman | Assignee: | Kristina Chodorow (Inactive) |
| Resolution: | Done | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | None | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Issue Links: |
|
||||||||||||
| Backwards Compatibility: | Fully Compatible | ||||||||||||
| Participants: | |||||||||||||
| Description |
|
ApplyOpsCmd calls applyOperation_inlock() but does not return the result code. Is there an issue analogous to Also the same question for
|
| Comments |
| Comment by auto [ 13/Feb/12 ] |
|
Author: {u'login': u'kchodorow', u'name': u'Kristina', u'email': u'kristina@10gen.com'}Message: Added array of success/failures to applyOps output |
| Comment by Eliot Horowitz (Inactive) [ 11/Nov/11 ] |
|
We should return an array of passes/fails. This is currently only used for sharding splits, where all pre and post conditions are checked, so no issues today. But if this command becomes more used, might happen. |
| Comment by auto [ 11/Nov/11 ] |
|
Author: {u'login': u'dwight', u'name': u'dwight', u'email': u'dwight@10gen.com'}Message: |