You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I've noticed that a consequence of using the paxos chain to manage the master lease is that we end up with mixed application level and election level data in the log.
If we were to add a new parameter to def advance_instance in replicated_value.py so that the caller can specify if the value should be persisted to the log or not. And we'd keep track of the paxos instance number separately, so having it not matching the file length is not an issue. Do you see any disadvantage with this approach?
Is there any use case in where it'd be useful to read the election result from the log?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I've noticed that a consequence of using the paxos chain to manage the master lease is that we end up with mixed application level and election level data in the log.
If we were to add a new parameter to
def advance_instance
inreplicated_value.py
so that the caller can specify if the value should be persisted to the log or not. And we'd keep track of the paxos instance number separately, so having it not matching the file length is not an issue. Do you see any disadvantage with this approach?Is there any use case in where it'd be useful to read the election result from the log?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: