[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-11393?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14988826#comment-14988826
]
Enis Soztutar commented on HBASE-11393:
---------------------------------------
bq. Sounds good. But it has no relates with this issue. Shall we open another
one to do it?
Sorry to drag other changes into that. But I think they are related since if we
unify them at the ReplicationPeerConfiguration, we can also store the info
under the same znode (rather than having the tableCFs znode and the peer
znode). wdyt?
bq. Shall we unify them?
Makes sense.
> Replication TableCfs should be a PB object rather than a string
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-11393
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-11393
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Reporter: Enis Soztutar
> Fix For: 2.0.0
>
> Attachments: HBASE-11393.patch, HBASE-11393_v1.patch,
> HBASE-11393_v2.patch, HBASE-11393_v3.patch, HBASE-11393_v4.patch,
> HBASE-11393_v5.patch, HBASE-11393_v6.patch, HBASE-11393_v7.patch,
> HBASE-11393_v8.patch
>
>
> We concatenate the list of tables and column families in format
> "table1:cf1,cf2;table2:cfA,cfB" in zookeeper for table-cf to replication peer
> mapping.
> This results in ugly parsing code. We should do this a PB object.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
