Andrew Wang created HDFS-12207:
----------------------------------
Summary: A few DataXceiver#writeBlock cleanups related to optional
storage IDs and types
Key: HDFS-12207
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-12207
Project: Hadoop HDFS
Issue Type: Improvement
Components: datanode
Affects Versions: 3.0.0-alpha4
Reporter: Andrew Wang
Here's the conversation that [~ehiggs] and I had on HDFS-12151 regarding some
improvements:
bq. Should we use nst > 0 rather than targetStorageTypes.length > 0 (amended)
here for clarity?
Yes.
bq. Should the targetStorageTypes.length > 0 check really be nsi > 0? We could
elide it then since it's already captured in the outside if.
This does look redundant since targetStorageIds.length will be either 0 or ==
targetStorageTypes.length
bq. Finally, I don't understand why we need to add the targeted ID/type for
checkAccess. Each DN only needs to validate itself, yea? BTSM#checkAccess
indicates this in its javadoc, but it looks like we run through ourselves and
the targets each time:
That seems like a good simplification. I think I had assumed the BTI and
requested types being checked should be the same (String - String, uint64 -
uint64); but I don't see a reason why they have to be. Chris Douglas, what do
you think?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
