Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

grpclb: fallback timer only when not already using fallback backends (v1.42.x backport) #8648

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 2, 2021

Conversation

temawi
Copy link
Contributor

@temawi temawi commented Nov 2, 2021

(#8646)

Addresses a problem where we initially only resolve addresses to the backends, but not the load balancer and then later resolve addresses to both. In this situation the fallback timer was started during the second instance even if it resulted in the timer later failing as we were already using fallback backends.

This change assures that a fallback time is only ever started if we are not already using the fallback backends.

This is a follow-up fix to #8253.

…grpc#8646)

Addresses a problem where we initially only resolve addresses to the backends, but not the load balancer and then later resolve addresses to both. In this situation the fallback timer was started during the second instance even if it resulted in the timer later failing as we were already using fallback backends.

This change assures that a fallback time is only ever started if we are not already using the fallback backends.

This is a follow-up fix to grpc#8253.
@temawi temawi enabled auto-merge (squash) November 2, 2021 22:40
@ejona86 ejona86 changed the title grpclb: fallback timer only when not already using fallback backends grpclb: fallback timer only when not already using fallback backends (v1.42.x backport) Nov 2, 2021
@temawi temawi merged commit 03c49f7 into grpc:v1.42.x Nov 2, 2021
@temawi temawi deleted the v1.42.x-grpclb-fallback-timer-fix branch November 2, 2021 23:14
@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Feb 1, 2022
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants