[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BOOKKEEPER-580?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13700174#comment-13700174
]
Ivan Kelly commented on BOOKKEEPER-580:
---------------------------------------
I had another look at the patch. The check is only protecting against 2 local
calls of close(), fencing doesn't even come into it. The fencing case is
handled in LedgerMetadata#resolveConflict(). The only justification for
changing this for 2+ local calls would be to flag an error to the user. I don't
think this is strong enough of a justification for a compatibility break though.
> improve close logic
> -------------------
>
> Key: BOOKKEEPER-580
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BOOKKEEPER-580
> Project: Bookkeeper
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: bookkeeper-client
> Reporter: Sijie Guo
> Assignee: Sijie Guo
> Fix For: 4.2.2, 4.3.0
>
> Attachments: 0001-BOOKKEEPER-580-improve-close-logic.patch,
> BOOKKEEPER-580.diff, BOOKKEEPER-580.diff
>
>
> currently, bookkeeper client still write ledger metadata to metadata storage
> even the metadata is already closed or undergoing closing. which would cause
> lots of bad version metadata update encountering unrecoverable errors in
> ledger handle. e.g. NotEnoughtBookiesException.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
