busbey commented on a change in pull request #1034: HBASE-23622 Reduced the
number of Checkstyle violations in hbase-common
URL: https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/1034#discussion_r366464295
##########
File path:
hbase-common/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/util/CommonFSUtils.java
##########
@@ -557,71 +508,45 @@ static void setStoragePolicy(final FileSystem fs, final
Path path, final String
*/
private static void invokeSetStoragePolicy(final FileSystem fs, final Path
path,
final String storagePolicy) throws IOException {
- Method m = null;
Exception toThrow = null;
+
try {
- m = fs.getClass().getDeclaredMethod("setStoragePolicy",
- new Class<?>[] { Path.class, String.class });
- m.setAccessible(true);
- } catch (NoSuchMethodException e) {
- toThrow = e;
- final String msg = "FileSystem doesn't support setStoragePolicy;
HDFS-6584 not available";
- if (!warningMap.containsKey(fs)) {
- warningMap.put(fs, true);
- LOG.warn(msg, e);
- } else if (LOG.isDebugEnabled()) {
- LOG.debug(msg, e);
+ fs.setStoragePolicy(path, storagePolicy);
+
+ if (LOG.isDebugEnabled()) {
+ LOG.debug("Set storagePolicy=" + storagePolicy + " for path=" + path);
}
- m = null;
- } catch (SecurityException e) {
+ } catch (Exception e) {
toThrow = e;
- final String msg = "No access to setStoragePolicy on FileSystem;
HDFS-6584 not available";
+ // This swallows FNFE, should we be throwing it? seems more likely to
indicate dev
+ // misuse than a runtime problem with HDFS.
if (!warningMap.containsKey(fs)) {
warningMap.put(fs, true);
- LOG.warn(msg, e);
+ LOG.warn("Unable to set storagePolicy=" + storagePolicy + " for path="
+ path, e);
} else if (LOG.isDebugEnabled()) {
- LOG.debug(msg, e);
+ LOG.debug("Unable to set storagePolicy=" + storagePolicy + " for
path=" + path, e);
}
- m = null; // could happen on setAccessible()
- }
- if (m != null) {
- try {
- m.invoke(fs, path, storagePolicy);
- if (LOG.isDebugEnabled()) {
- LOG.debug("Set storagePolicy=" + storagePolicy + " for path=" +
path);
- }
- } catch (Exception e) {
- toThrow = e;
- // This swallows FNFE, should we be throwing it? seems more likely to
indicate dev
- // misuse than a runtime problem with HDFS.
- if (!warningMap.containsKey(fs)) {
- warningMap.put(fs, true);
- LOG.warn("Unable to set storagePolicy=" + storagePolicy + " for
path=" + path, e);
- } else if (LOG.isDebugEnabled()) {
- LOG.debug("Unable to set storagePolicy=" + storagePolicy + " for
path=" + path, e);
- }
- // check for lack of HDFS-7228
- if (e instanceof InvocationTargetException) {
- final Throwable exception = e.getCause();
- if (exception instanceof RemoteException &&
- HadoopIllegalArgumentException.class.getName().equals(
- ((RemoteException)exception).getClassName())) {
- if (LOG.isDebugEnabled()) {
- LOG.debug("Given storage policy, '" +storagePolicy +"', was
rejected and probably " +
- "isn't a valid policy for the version of Hadoop you're
running. I.e. if you're " +
- "trying to use SSD related policies then you're likely missing
HDFS-7228. For " +
- "more information see the 'ArchivalStorage' docs for your
Hadoop release.");
- }
+ // check for lack of HDFS-7228
+ if (e instanceof InvocationTargetException) {
Review comment:
Now that we're not using reflection, this should be a direct check for
`RemoteException` because it won't be wrapped in the reflection invocation
exception.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
With regards,
Apache Git Services
