datastax
Service order during downgrade
I noticed that when changing the Pulsar version, the same order of updates (1. zookeeper, 2. bookkeeper, etc) is used for downgrades as during an upgrade. I would have thought that the order would be reversed during a downgrade, i.e. the pulsar proxy would be updated first, then broker, etc.
I'm not sure why this would be a better approach. The upgrade order is mostly following the components dependencies.
Also it's not obvious to understand whether the pulsar version change to the a newer or older since we don't know the internal ZK/BK versions
@eolivelli @michaeljmarshall what do you think ?
I would have thought that the order would be reversed during a downgrade
This matches what I would expect as a user since it limits the version matrix on the live cluster. I am not very familiar with the requirements on the upgrade order though.
Also it's not obvious to understand whether the pulsar version change to the a newer or older since we don't know the internal ZK/BK versions
This is a pretty good/interesting point.
Also it's not obvious to understand whether the pulsar version change to the a newer or older since we don't know the internal ZK/BK versions
Why would you need to know this? Is there a case where the pulsar version would be higher but the internal ZK/BK version is lower, or vice versa? If so, then you are already upgrading/downgrading in unexpected ways.