> On Jun 30, 2022, at 10:40 AM, Michael McCandless
> wrote:
>
> +1 to provide a timeout, or, to simply fix close to aggressively close
> regardless of what the replicas are doing?
Yes, aggressively closing would be great for us - we already expect the primary
can and will crash, so an aggr
+1 to provide a timeout, or, to simply fix close to aggressively close
regardless of what the replicas are doing?
It's not a great design for primary to be so dependent on the replicas (but
vice/versa makes sense?).
Maybe open a Jira issue or starting PR so we can discuss?
Thanks for uncovering
