Hi Eli, and thank you for the reply! I think you are correct and at this point it’s clear that the majority write concern is the issue.
The problem is that it’s not intended to be that way for PSA. I think, current state almost entirely eliminates the primary purpose (or one of) of a replica set when using PSA – failover. There is not much difference between PSA and using a standalone at this point.
PS: I tried using a PSS with a hidden voting secondary with buildIndexes off to make a “sort-of” arbiter of a data-bearing node, but evidently I needed to set setIndexCommitQuorum
to 1 before doing so. Interestingly, it worked initially, but after a few hours commit quorum errors started flowing and I rolled back to PSA. Not sure if anything else was to be done there.
Anyway I’m trying to make a PSA or similar set up to provide a failover. I understand that there are some potential issues with transactions and rollbacks, but anything is better than not having a replica set working when any member goes down. Any help is appreciated!