bharathv commented on a change in pull request #3566:
URL: https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/3566#discussion_r687946455
##########
File path:
hbase-server/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/regionserver/RSRpcServices.java
##########
@@ -308,18 +310,35 @@
*/
private static final long
DEFAULT_REGION_SERVER_RPC_MINIMUM_SCAN_TIME_LIMIT_DELTA = 10;
- /*
+ /**
* Whether to reject rows with size > threshold defined by
* {@link RSRpcServices#BATCH_ROWS_THRESHOLD_NAME}
*/
private static final String REJECT_BATCH_ROWS_OVER_THRESHOLD =
"hbase.rpc.rows.size.threshold.reject";
- /*
+ /**
* Default value of config {@link
RSRpcServices#REJECT_BATCH_ROWS_OVER_THRESHOLD}
*/
private static final boolean DEFAULT_REJECT_BATCH_ROWS_OVER_THRESHOLD =
false;
+ /**
+ * Determine the bootstrap nodes we want to return to the client connection
registry.
+ * <ul>
+ * <li>{@link #MASTER}: return masters as bootstrap nodes.</li>
Review comment:
Ah ok. It appeared that you intended to keep both MasterRegistry,
RpcConnectionRegistry with masters. Misunderstanding.
> Maybe we should rename RpcConnectionRegistry to RegionServerRegistry, and
all the configuration names should be changed.
To me this sounds like something we should do, explicitly communicates that
we want RS to be the bootstrap points and master is no where. So +1 on this.
Not sure what others think or if they have a different preference. To me its ok
to not change the configuration names, but I'm also if you plan to change them.
> And the plan here is to deprecate MasterRegistry in 2.5.0, not 4.0.0, we
will remove it in 4.0.0...
Ya thats what I meant, typo
--
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.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
