These are chat archives for atomix/atomix
I'm not taking about clusters being static in general, I'm talking clusters being generally static in consensus based systems. Adding and removing nodes can be extremely expensive, and arbitrarily removing nodes from a cluster impacts fault tolerance. For these reasons, there's little benefit to completely removing a node from a cluster.
What Atomix 2.0 will have is slightly more dynamic clusters, but it will never forget nodes without administrator intervention. Atomix can't do what Hazelcast does (use multicast for cluster management) because of the consensus protocol. But we can control which nodes participate in the consensus protocol based on liveness. Atomix 2.0 uses a phi accrual failure detector to determine when nodes become unavailable and will rebalance partitions when a node goes down, but the node will never be forgotten without administrator intervention, because forgetting a node removes the possibility of rebalancing partitions for better performance if a node eventually comes back online. Administrators will always have to explicitly add or remove nodes from the cluster.