[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20894?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16565652#comment-16565652
]
stack commented on HBASE-20894:
-------------------------------
nit: 49 required bool isPrimaryReplicaBlock = 4; is a bad name for a data
member...Should it be primary_replica_block in pb proc format? As is, it is
the name of a method that queries about primaryReplicaBlock (Does PB generate
methods that look like isIsPrimaryReplicaBlock?). Format of required int32
deserialiserIndex = 4; could change too to deserializer_index?
On....
{code}
1119 throw new IOException("Persistence file does not start
with protobuf magic number. " +
1120 persistencePath);
{code}
Should we tell operator remove the old file? Do you know if this IOE kills
cache startup or we report and just continue skipping rehydration of persisted
cache?
On above, perhaps add to the IOE message to remove the file?
Otherwise +1. Looks great. Nice cleanup.
> Move BucketCache from java serialization to protobuf
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-20894
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20894
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: BucketCache
> Affects Versions: 2.0.0
> Reporter: Mike Drob
> Assignee: Mike Drob
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: 3.0.0
>
> Attachments:
> 0001-Write-the-CacheableDeserializerIdManager-index-into-.patch,
> HBASE-20894.WIP-2.patch, HBASE-20894.WIP.patch, HBASE-20894.master.001.patch,
> HBASE-20894.master.002.patch, HBASE-20894.master.003.patch,
> HBASE-20894.master.004.patch, HBASE-20894.master.005.patch
>
>
> We should use a better serialization format instead of Java Serialization for
> the BucketCache entry persistence.
> Suggested by Chris McCown, who does not appear to have a JIRA account.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
