My proposal can be found above: > 1) *Igfs* is left as is - this is base interface; > 2) IgniteFS is renamed to "*IgniteIgfs*", meaning that this is Ignite's implementation of IGFS; > 3) IgfsHadoopFileSystemWrapper is renamed to "*HadoopIgfs*", meaning that this another IGFS implementation which works over Hadoop FileSystem; > 4) IgfsHadoopFileSystem is renamed to *IgniteFileSystem*, meaning that this is Ignite's implementation of Hadoop FileSystem API.
With such namings we will clearly indicate tow things: - Everything, what ends with "Igfs" is IGFS implementation (IgniteIgfs - our in-memory impl, HadoopIgfs - another impl working over Hadoop FileSystem); - Everything, what has "FileSystem" in name is Hadoop FileSystem implementation (IgniteFileSystem - *Ignite*'s implementation of *FileSystem* ). On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 8:44 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <[email protected]> wrote: > Something definitely smells about the naming here. It is vague and > confusing. If it is only used as a secondary file system configuration, > maybe we should name it as such. > > Can you propose another name? > > D. > > On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 12:39 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > This wrapper is one of Igfs implementations. If user want to configure > > secondary Igfs which is backed by Hadoop FileSystem, he should create > that > > "wrapper" and set it as "secondaryFIleSystem" in "IgfsConfiguration". > > > > On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 8:32 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan < > [email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > Sounds like something is wrong. I am still not clear why should our > users > > > even know about the wrapper. Can you please explain? > > > > > > D. > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 8:56 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <[email protected] > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > IgfsHadoopFileSystem is implementation of FileSystem (Hadoop > > interface). > > > > IgfsHadoopFileSystemWrapper is implementation of Igfs which delegates > > > IGFS > > > > API calls to underlying Hadoop FileSystem. > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 4:39 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan < > > > [email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Vova, > > > > > > > > > > I agree that it smells. Can you explain again the difference > between > > > > > IgfsHadoopFileSystem and IgfsHadoopFileSystemWrapper? > > > > > > > > > > D. > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 5:21 AM, Vladimir Ozerov < > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > HI, > > > > > > > > > > > > Currently we have IgfsHadoopFileSystemWrapper class whose sole > > > purpose > > > > is > > > > > > to instantiate Hadoop FileSystem and delegate Igfs calls to it. > We > > > use > > > > > this > > > > > > class to configure secondary Hadoop file system for Igfs. > > > > > > > > > > > > It seems to me that "Wrapper" is wrong suffix here from user > > > > perspective, > > > > > > as this is not a wrapper, but a functional unit which user uses > in > > > > > > configuration. It does not "wraps" anything from user point of > > view. > > > > > > > > > > > > Furthermore, we do have public classes IgfsHadoopFileSystem which > > > have > > > > no > > > > > > realtion to IgfsHadoopFileSystemWrapper, what will also confuse > > > users. > > > > > > > > > > > > We need to think about another class name here. May be > > > > > > "IgfsHadoopFileSystemDelegator" or something like this? > > > > > > > > > > > > Any thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > > > Vladimir. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
