[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-16837?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17634091#comment-17634091
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on HDFS-16837:
---------------------------------------
tomscut commented on PR #5123:
URL: https://github.com/apache/hadoop/pull/5123#issuecomment-1314588275
> Code looks good to me. Do you know why there are these new Spotbugs
violations?
Because of this change, and we did not config configure filter.
`hadoop-hdfs-project/hadoop-hdfs-rbf/src/main/proto/FederationProtocol.proto
→ hadoop-hdfs-project/hadoop-hdfs-client/src/main/proto/FederationProtocol.proto
`
One small question. If we migrate `FederationProtocol.proto` directly to the
`hadoop-hdfs-client` directory, do you think this is reasonable? @ZanderXu
@goiri @simbadzina
> [RBF SBN] ClientGSIContext should merge RouterFederatedStates to get the max
> state id for each namespace
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-16837
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-16837
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: ZanderXu
> Assignee: ZanderXu
> Priority: Major
> Labels: pull-request-available
>
> ClientGSIContext should merge local and remote RouterFederatedState to get
> the max state id for each namespace.
> And the related code as bellows:
> {code:java}
> @Override
> public synchronized void receiveResponseState(RpcResponseHeaderProto header) {
> if (header.hasRouterFederatedState()) {
> // BUG here
> routerFederatedState = header.getRouterFederatedState();
> } else {
> lastSeenStateId.accumulate(header.getStateId());
> }
> } {code}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
