Agreed with it. The changing of 'rpc_address' and 'rpc_port' for ConfigNodes is reasonable.
But if we provide rpc service for ConfigNode in the future, the rpc_address for ConfigNode may be re-enabled again. 冯 庆新 <qingxin.f...@hotmail.com> 于2022年6月30日周四 11:40写道： > > +1 > > 发件人: Yuan Tian<mailto:jackietie...@gmail.com> > 发送时间: 2022年6月30日 11:23 > 收件人: dev<mailto:dev@iotdb.apache.org> > 主题: Re: Change rpc_address to internal_address in ConfigNode and refactor > show cluster > > +1 > > Best, > ------------- > Yuan Tian > > On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 9:45 AM Jialin Qiao <qiaojia...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > As ConfigNode only serve DataNodes and other ConfigNode. > > > > The rpc_address in ConfigNode should be internal_address. > > The rpc_port in ConfigNode should be internal_port. > > > > After this, the show cluster function needs to be refactored. > > > > Previously, show cluster print the rpc_address of DataNode and ConfigNode, > > however, rpc_address for DataNode is the client_rpc_service. > > > > So it's better to print the internal_address of DataNode and ConfigNode. > > > > What do you think? > > > > Thanks, > > ————————————————— > > Jialin Qiao > > Apache IoTDB PMC >
