I am forwarding this request from user@

We should state somehow how we support rollbacks.

In general we do not have much support for it.
We only try to not enable new format of data on disk by default. This way
you can update the binaries and then use the new format only if you need to
use a new feature that requires such format.
If you enable the new format there is no way to rollback.
We could have some tool that tries to convert to the previous format.

We should also talk about this topic on the website, even if we do not
still provide any tool for the rollback.

Thoughts?


---------- Forwarded message ---------
Da: Subash K <subas...@ericsson.com>
Date: Ven 17 Apr 2020, 16:32
Subject: RE: Rollback of Apache Bookeeper
To: u...@bookkeeper.apache.org <u...@bookkeeper.apache.org>


Thanks a lot Enrico 😊



Regards,

Subash Kunjupillai



*From:* Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com>
*Sent:* Friday, April 17, 2020 7:10 PM
*To:* user <u...@bookkeeper.apache.org>
*Subject:* Re: Rollback of Apache Bookeeper



Subash

I will discuss about this topic on dev@bookkeeper.apache.org list

best regards

Enrico



Il giorno ven 17 apr 2020 alle ore 12:47 Subash K <subas...@ericsson.com>
ha scritto:

If rollback is technically supported by Bookkeeper, may be updating the
website will help us better for now.



Regards,

Subash Kunjupillai



*From:* Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com>
*Sent:* Friday, April 17, 2020 3:44 PM
*To:* user <u...@bookkeeper.apache.org>
*Subject:* Re: Rollback of Apache Bookeeper





Il Ven 17 Apr 2020, 11:59 Subash K <subas...@ericsson.com> ha scritto:

Sure. But as I’m just evaluating Apache Pulsar along with Bookkeeper, we
are trying to understand various factors like Deployment, Life Cycle
Management, etc.. Because these factors will be critical as it would create
an impact on our existing product strategy.



For now, we will take in that Rollback is not supported out of box. I feel
that, rollback support should be brought in at the earliest to support
organizations like us.

In my opinion current releases of Bookkeeper support rollback.

We do not have automated testing but we have this principle of being
backward compatible with the previous version.



Maybe we just lack an official statement on the website about this rule.



Enrico







Regards,

Subash Kunjupillai



*From:* Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com>
*Sent:* Friday, April 17, 2020 3:16 PM
*To:* user <u...@bookkeeper.apache.org>
*Subject:* Re: Rollback of Apache Bookeeper





Il Ven 17 Apr 2020, 10:59 Subash K <subas...@ericsson.com> ha scritto:

Thanks for your answers Enrico.



On a high level, I understand that rollback is not supported and there is
no plan to test and support it. But technically it is possible to do a
rollback if new feature is not enabled after upgrade which is likely to
change the file format.



>From the document, I see that there is option to rollback the file format
after upgrade. Will this help us if we have to perform the rollback of data
format as well?



bookkeeper-server/bin/bookkeeper upgrade --rollback

Actually that command was needed for very old versions of BK.

I have been using it since 4.4 and never needed that command.

In my opinion it is because since 4.4 BK payed more attention in making
changes more safely



A good option to you may be to check the version you are using and the one
you want to upgrade to and if you have questions ask on this ML.



We will be happy to support



Enrico









Regards,

Subash Kunjupillai



*From:* Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com>
*Sent:* 16 April 2020 19:47
*To:* user <u...@bookkeeper.apache.org>
*Subject:* Re: Rollback of Apache Bookeeper







Il giorno gio 16 apr 2020 alle ore 15:01 Subash K <subas...@ericsson.com>
ha scritto:

Hi Enrico,



Thanks for your response.



I’ve following queries on top of your response:

   - In general is community planning to test and support issues in
   rollback of Bookkeeper down the lane?

Unfortunately no.

We are only testing regular upgrades, not rollback.

It should be doable with current docker based integration testing tools.






   -
   - We might not frequently upgrade Bookkeeper unless it is demanded by
   Pulsar. In that case, we might skip few intermediate versions and upgrade
   directly to an higher version. In that case, are we foreseeing any
   compatibility change that will cause hinderance during rollback?

Usually this is not a problem. As far as you continue to upgrade from a
supported version to a supported version. If I remember correctly currently
we are officially supporting only BK 4.8 to 4.10.




   -
   - I’ve not fully gone through the internal working of Bookkeeper. But I
   would like to understand, can old version of bookie(after rollback) access
   the new data stored by upgraded bookie?

Usually yes, as far as you do not activate new features that need a new
format of data on disk



Enrico






   -



Regards,

Subash Kunjupillai



*From:* Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com>
*Sent:* 16 April 2020 16:05
*To:* user <u...@bookkeeper.apache.org>
*Subject:* Re: Rollback of Apache Bookeeper



Hi Subash,

usually by default there is no problem in rolling back to the previous
version.

For instance if you are running 4.9 and you upgrade to 4.10 your bookies
you can downgrade to 4.9 just by using the old code.

This is because we introduce new features but they are disabled by default
at least for one release.



But I suggest you to perform a test about the rollback before going to
production



Enrico





Il giorno gio 16 apr 2020 alle ore 12:23 Subash K <subas...@ericsson.com>
ha scritto:

Hi,



We are planning to introduce Apache Pulsar in our product. In general we
always support upgrade and rollback of our product.


So I'm trying to understand is there any defined steps provided to support
rollback of Apache Bookeeper to its earlier version after completing full
cluster upgrade? I was not able to find those information in
https://bookkeeper.apache.org/docs/latest/admin/upgrade/
<https://slack-redir.net/link?url=https%3A%2F%2Fbookkeeper.apache.org%2Fdocs%2Flatest%2Fadmin%2Fupgrade%2F&v=3>



Regards,

Subash Kunjupillai

Reply via email to