[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-9542?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15111121#comment-15111121
]
Jing Zhao commented on HDFS-9542:
---------------------------------
Thanks for the review, [~szetszwo], [~drankye] and [~vinayrpet]!
bq. Just wonder if it's a good idea to rename: generationStampV1 =>
legacyGenerationStamp; generationStampV2 => generationStamp, similar for other
variables, as we have legacy block and block.
+1 on the rename. I tried to do this on top of the current patch but looks like
all the rename (including renames on corresponding public methods) will
increase the patch size a lot. I just created HDFS-9677 and plan to do the
rename there.
I will commit the current patch shortly.
> Move BlockIdManager from FSNamesystem to BlockManager
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-9542
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-9542
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: namenode
> Reporter: Jing Zhao
> Assignee: Jing Zhao
> Attachments: HDFS-9542.000.patch, HDFS-9542.001.patch
>
>
> Semantically BlockIdManager should be a field in BlockManager instead of
> FSNamesystem.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
