[SERVER-6457] Secondary syncing to hidden secondary Created: 16/Jul/12 Updated: 15/Aug/12 Resolved: 16/Jul/12 |
|
| Status: | Closed |
| Project: | Core Server |
| Component/s: | Replication |
| Affects Version/s: | 2.0.6 |
| Fix Version/s: | None |
| Type: | Bug | Priority: | Major - P3 |
| Reporter: | Colin Howe | Assignee: | Scott Hernandez (Inactive) |
| Resolution: | Duplicate | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | None | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Issue Links: |
|
||||||||||||||||
| Operating System: | ALL | ||||||||||||||||
| Participants: | |||||||||||||||||
| Description |
|
We have a secondary node that is syncing to another secondary that is marked as hidden. My understanding was that hidden would stop the secondary from being used as a sync source. We have a smallish box created purely for backups. During the backup process the server cannot keep up with replication and so falls behind (but recovers after the backup is finished). As we know that the server gets behind we don't want any of the other servers using it as a replication source. Further, even if it is picked... once it gets laggy the other server should have the sense to change to a different replication source. |
| Comments |
| Comment by Colin Howe [ 16/Jul/12 ] |
|
I wondered if that might be the case... thanks! |
| Comment by Scott Hernandez (Inactive) [ 16/Jul/12 ] |
|
I've linked to a feature request which may fix the issue and give more control over this. If you set the backup as having a slaveDelay > 0 (even 1) then it will not be used as a replication source ( |