phet commented on code in PR #3929:
URL: https://github.com/apache/gobblin/pull/3929#discussion_r1571501261
##########
gobblin-data-management/src/main/java/org/apache/gobblin/data/management/copy/writer/FileAwareInputStreamDataWriter.java:
##########
@@ -90,6 +90,8 @@ public class FileAwareInputStreamDataWriter extends
InstrumentedDataWriter<FileA
public static final boolean DEFAULT_GOBBLIN_COPY_CHECK_FILESIZE = false;
public static final String GOBBLIN_COPY_TASK_OVERWRITE_ON_COMMIT =
"gobblin.copy.task.overwrite.on.commit";
public static final boolean DEFAULT_GOBBLIN_COPY_TASK_OVERWRITE_ON_COMMIT =
false;
+ public static final String GOBBLIN_COPY_REQUIRE_PERMISSION_SET_FOR_SUCCESS =
"gobblin.copy.requirePermissionSetForSuccess";
+ public static final boolean DEFAULT_COPY_REQUIRE_PERMISSION_SET_FOR_SUCCESS
= false;
Review Comment:
when wouldn't one want failure? I'd be more aggressive in choosing the
default. while it does require a config change, one can always easily revert
to the legacy semantics. hence not b/w-compat, but easily opted-into, as
desired
##########
gobblin-data-management/src/main/java/org/apache/gobblin/data/management/copy/publisher/CopyDataPublisher.java:
##########
@@ -95,6 +95,7 @@ public boolean isThreadSafe() {
protected final DataFileVersionStrategy dstDataFileVersionStrategy;
protected final boolean preserveDirModTime;
protected final boolean resyncDirOwnerAndPermission;
+ protected final boolean requirePermissionSetForSuccess;
Review Comment:
nit: IMO sounds more complicated this way, when it seems pretty common sense
that failure on setting perms should fail the job. hence I'd personally
reorient/reverse/rephrase to `shouldFailWhenPermissionFail` or
`fatalPermsUpdateFailure`
--
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]
