[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-892?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12853630#action_12853630
]
Doug Cutting commented on HDFS-892:
-----------------------------------
> Q. Doug, Any reason why you didn't define the @Nullable in common?
That would only make sense if the rest of Avro's reflect code were in common,
since it's the reflect code that interprets this annotation. Hadoop is the
primary user of Avro reflect, but I don't think the only user.
> Will this prevent us from putting the DatanodeProtocol in a different port?
No more so than the current implementation does. I don't know what the plan is
to implement multiple ports. The obvious approach would be to run multiple
org.apache.hadoop.ipc.Servers, each serving different objects implementing
different protocols. That would work fine with Avro too.
> Was the super-interface added to avoid the duplicate "versioned" interface?
No, the super-interface was added because Avro needs to know the full set of
methods that a given service implements. But Namenode has lots of other public
methods that are not protocol methods, so we can't otherwise determine the
intended set of protocol methods.
> optionally use Avro for namenode RPC
> ------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-892
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-892
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: name-node
> Reporter: Doug Cutting
> Assignee: Doug Cutting
> Fix For: 0.22.0
>
> Attachments: HDFS-892.patch, HDFS-892.patch, HDFS-892.patch,
> HDFS-892.patch, HDFS-892.patch, HDFS-892.patch
>
>
> It should be possible to configure HDFS so that Avro is used for RPCs to the
> namenode.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
