This actually includes two changes:
1) No newlines to take the master-slave link up when the upstream master
is down. Doing this is dangerous because the sub-slave often is received
replication protocol for an half-command, so can't receive newlines
without desyncing the replication link, even with the code in order to
cancel out the bytes that PSYNC2 was using. Moreover this is probably
also not needed/sane, because anyway the slave can keep serving
requests, and because if it's configured to don't serve stale data, it's
a good idea, actually, to break the link.
2) When a +CONTINUE with a different ID is received, we now break
connection with the sub-slaves: they need to be notified as well. This
was part of the original specification but for some reason it was not
implemented in the code, and was alter found as a PSYNC2 bug in the
integration testing.
This actually includes two changes:
1) No newlines to take the master-slave link up when the upstream master
is down. Doing this is dangerous because the sub-slave often is received
replication protocol for an half-command, so can't receive newlines
without desyncing the replication link, even with the code in order to
cancel out the bytes that PSYNC2 was using. Moreover this is probably
also not needed/sane, because anyway the slave can keep serving
requests, and because if it's configured to don't serve stale data, it's
a good idea, actually, to break the link.
2) When a +CONTINUE with a different ID is received, we now break
connection with the sub-slaves: they need to be notified as well. This
was part of the original specification but for some reason it was not
implemented in the code, and was alter found as a PSYNC2 bug in the
integration testing.
This actually includes two changes:
1) No newlines to take the master-slave link up when the upstream master
is down. Doing this is dangerous because the sub-slave often is received
replication protocol for an half-command, so can't receive newlines
without desyncing the replication link, even with the code in order to
cancel out the bytes that PSYNC2 was using. Moreover this is probably
also not needed/sane, because anyway the slave can keep serving
requests, and because if it's configured to don't serve stale data, it's
a good idea, actually, to break the link.
2) When a +CONTINUE with a different ID is received, we now break
connection with the sub-slaves: they need to be notified as well. This
was part of the original specification but for some reason it was not
implemented in the code, and was alter found as a PSYNC2 bug in the
integration testing.
This is the PSYNC2 test that helped find issues in the code, and that
still can show a protocol desync from time to time. Work is in progress
in order to find the issue. For now the test is not enabled in "make
test" and must be run manually.
This is the PSYNC2 test that helped find issues in the code, and that
still can show a protocol desync from time to time. Work is in progress
in order to find the issue. For now the test is not enabled in "make
test" and must be run manually.
This is the PSYNC2 test that helped find issues in the code, and that
still can show a protocol desync from time to time. Work is in progress
in order to find the issue. For now the test is not enabled in "make
test" and must be run manually.
