sijie commented on issue #774: Open should run recovery by default URL: https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/774#issuecomment-347056937 the summary of my opinion on this : - from a storage system perspective, open should not have any implicit impacts on the current writer. if open wants to have a side effort (e.g. fence and recovery), it should be called out explicitly either by `withRecovery(true)` or `withOpenFlags(O_FENCE)`. - from user education/adoption awareness, a `multiple readers` semantic has more use cases that a `single reader` semantic. from this sense, we should encourage tailing and have recovery default to `false`. - the original api was designed for logging, `openLedgerNoRecovery` was added after `openLedger`. if we want to grow beyond logging into a storage system, we should have openLedger with no recovery as default. It is what most of the people would expect from a storage system. - regarding `safer` point, if a user already used bookkeeper and he/she knew bookkeeper, knew the difference between openLedger and openLedgerNoRecovery, when he migrates to the new API, they will find a way mapping openLedger and openLedgerNoRecovery into the new builder API. Javadoc, documentation, and release notes will provide the guide for existing users. It is not a problem for existing users. We should develop the storage mindshare for people who is new to bookkeeper, where *open ledger doesn't implicit close current writer* is making more sense as a storage.
---------------------------------------------------------------- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org With regards, Apache Git Services
