suryaprasanna commented on code in PR #18295:
URL: https://github.com/apache/hudi/pull/18295#discussion_r3003759531
##########
hudi-client/hudi-client-common/src/main/java/org/apache/hudi/config/HoodieLockConfig.java:
##########
@@ -241,6 +248,16 @@ public class HoodieLockConfig extends HoodieConfig {
@Deprecated
public static final String LOCK_PROVIDER_CLASS_PROP =
LOCK_PROVIDER_CLASS_NAME.key();
+ // Lock provider class names from modules not directly accessible in
hudi-client-common.
Review Comment:
Instead of introducing lock-provider-specific changes, could we move
metadata compaction or any table service into a higher-level API on
SparkRDDWriteClient for metadata-table table services?
Since compaction already has explicit scheduling/execution phases, it seems
cleaner to encapsulate the metadata-table service flow there and acquire the
main-table lock only around the finalization/publication step. That would keep
concurrency control at the table-service orchestration layer rather than
coupling behavior to individual lock providers.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
