[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-17460?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17835988#comment-17835988
]
xiaojunxiang commented on HDFS-17460:
-------------------------------------
[~Keepromise] Hi, I have aready added my reasons, Feel free to share your
thoughts.
> Make All HDFS Server side component uniform use the value of
> `dfs.internal.nameservices` to override `dfs.nameservices`
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-17460
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-17460
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: hdfs, rbf
> Reporter: xiaojunxiang
> Priority: Major
>
> In HDFS, `dfs.internal.nameservices` is a server-side configuration, while
> `dfs.nameservices` is both a server-side and HDFSClient-side configuration.
>
> The internal configuration implies it's for internal systems.
> Now on the DataNode and JournalNode side, the priority of
> dfs.internal.nameservices configuration is higher than `dfs.nameservices`,
> which makes sense. {color:#FF0000}*However,*{color} on the ZKFC + NameNode
> side, internal configuration isn't considered.
>
> In such a scenario, when I enable RBF, the NameNode side expects
> `dfs.nameservices`=ns1,ns2 (It now ignoring `dfs.internal.nameservices`),
> {color:#FF0000}while {color}the HDFSClient side expects
> `dfs.nameservices`=ns1,ns2,nsRouter (It now ignoring
> `dfs.internal.nameservices`).
> {color:#FF0000}This means they can't use the same configuration, It would be
> too inconvenient{color}
>
> If I unify all {color:#FF0000}server-side{color} configurations to use
> `dfs.internal.nameservices`, meaning using the value of
> `dfs.internal.nameservices` to {color:#FF0000}override
> {color}`dfs.nameservices` during process startup,
> {color:#FF0000}it brings the following benefits{color}:
> 1、Both server and HDFSClient can {color:#FF0000}use the same
> configuration{color}: `dfs.nameservices`=ns1,ns2,nsRouter,
> `dfs.internal.nameservices`=ns1,ns2.
> 2、Previously, the priority of `dfs.internal.nameservices` over
> `dfs.nameservices` was only considered in DataNode and JournalNode
> configurations, but NameNode didn't consider dfs.internal.nameservices. This
> inconsistency in internal services doesn't look good and can be avoided. And
> now, by unifying them, {color:#FF0000}it better aligns with the original
> semantic meaning of the word "internal" as it pertains to internal
> systems.{color}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
