[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-16326?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16858512#comment-16858512
]
Gabor Bota commented on HADOOP-16326:
-------------------------------------
+1 on do NOT remove: using the tests it turned out that I have an
implementation issue in my new code in HADOOP-16279. Without this, a potential
bug could have been submitted. So sometimes it's a good thing that we have
another test impl to catch potential bugs
> S3Guard: Remove LocalMetadataStore
> ----------------------------------
>
> Key: HADOOP-16326
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-16326
> Project: Hadoop Common
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: fs/s3
> Affects Versions: 3.3.0
> Reporter: Gabor Bota
> Priority: Minor
>
> We use LocalMetadataStore MetadataStore implementation in S3Guard only for
> testing.
> Inside it uses Guava's cache for storing metadatas. We try to mimic how
> dynamo should work under the hood, but with every new feature or API
> modification what we do on MetadataStore interface level it gets more and
> more complicated to implement the same feature with different behavior.
> I want to start a debate on why we need to remove that, or why we want to
> keep it.
> I could rant about why is it annoying to have this implementation when we
> need to get some things right to work with dynamo, and then do a totally
> different set of modification in the LocalMetadata to get the same outcome,
> and also add more tests just for the thing we use for testing.
> There are also areas in our ever-growing testing matrix that would need more
> attention instead of fixing tests for our test implementation. But on the
> other hand, it is good that we have another impl for the API which we can use
> for drafting new ideas.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
