[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-9151?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13537225#comment-13537225
]
Suresh Srinivas commented on HADOOP-9151:
-----------------------------------------
bq. I don't think it's a good idea to break compatibility for what amounts to
a surface-level cleanup...
bq. Despite the "alpha" label, there are a lot of people using it, and breaking
the compat should require a really good reason.
I agree that if possible we should avoid breaking the compatibility. But when a
cleanup can make the implementation lot more clear, I prefer making that
change. That is the reason why we use alpha and any one who uses that release
should be ready to adopt the changes.
bq. Plus that the overhead of creating new proto objects for every rpc may
already take a lot more resource than buffer copy
Not sure I understand this comment. Isn't the current byte[] coming from a
protobuf message already?
bq. And another concern is this protocol may be bad for async non-blocking io
Can you please explain how does the current proposal prevent this?
> Include RPC error info in RpcResponseHeader instead of sending it separately
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HADOOP-9151
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-9151
> Project: Hadoop Common
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Reporter: Sanjay Radia
> Assignee: Sanjay Radia
> Attachments: HADOOP-9151.patch
>
>
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
