sanpwc commented on code in PR #4821:
URL: https://github.com/apache/ignite-3/pull/4821#discussion_r1898305868
##########
modules/raft/src/main/java/org/apache/ignite/raft/jraft/core/NodeImpl.java:
##########
@@ -285,8 +289,10 @@ private class LogEntryAndClosureHandler implements
EventHandler<LogEntryAndClosu
// task list for batch
private final List<LogEntryAndClosure> tasks = new
ArrayList<>(NodeImpl.this.raftOptions.getApplyBatch());
+ private @Nullable HybridTimestamp safeTs = null;
Review Comment:
> Consider this our own mvcc related extention, which is isolated in a
replication layer.
I totally agree with this and thus I believe that having raft as safe time
unaware module is a better option. It wasn't true even before your PR because
of patching. However currently we put the logic much deeper inside raft: all
that timeoutNow specific processing, etc.
Unfortunately, it's pretty obvious that time for that discussion has already
gone.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: notifications-unsubscr...@ignite.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
