[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-6588?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14041112#comment-14041112
]
Yongjun Zhang commented on HDFS-6588:
-------------------------------------
Hi [~jingzhao], thanks a lot for the comments. Sorry I didn't make it clear.
What I wanted to say was that the getTrueCause method is part of the HDFS-5322
work, the reported tests failed here because of removing getTrueCause(). We
could modify the tests to make them pass, but my worry was that the tests were
set up to capture real user scenario, changing the test setup might make them
no longer reflect real user scenario.
Based on your answer above, however, I guess we could just modify the tests
accordingly after removing the getTrueCause() method. Please correct me if I'm
wrong. Thanks.
> Investigating removing getTrueCause method in Server.java
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-6588
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-6588
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: security, webhdfs
> Affects Versions: 2.5.0
> Reporter: Yongjun Zhang
> Assignee: Yongjun Zhang
>
> When addressing Daryn Sharp's comment for HDFS-6475 quoted below:
> {quote}
> What I'm saying is I think the patch adds too much unnecessary code. Filing
> an improvement to delete all but a few lines of the code changed in this
> patch seems a bit odd. I think you just need to:
> - Delete getTrueCause entirely instead of moving it elsewhere
> - In saslProcess, just throw the exception instead of running it through
> getTrueCause since it's not a "InvalidToken wrapping another exception"
> anymore.
> - Keep your 3-line change to unwrap SecurityException in toResponse
> {quote}
> There are multiple test failures, after making the suggested changes, Filing
> this jira to dedicate to the investigation of removing getTrueCause method.
> More detail will be put in the first comment.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
