[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-27298?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17716473#comment-17716473
]
John Sherman commented on HIVE-27298:
-------------------------------------
I'm inclined to go with:
a) since AbstractThriftHiveMetastore provides no value otherwise (users should
be implementing against ThriftHiveMetastore.Iface for similar guarantees that
AbstractThriftHiveMetastore today provides). The class name may be confusing,
but I also do not associate a class having Abstract in the name as being an
abstract class (others might though).
However, b has the advantage that it doesn't change the behavior that
downstream implementations may rely on (even if I think it is pointless).
Though, I work on one of the downstream implementations (IMPALA) and
AbstractThriftHiveMetastore was added to support our use case. I think Impala
is the only user of this class but I can't prove that.
> Provide implementation of HMS thrift service that throws
> UnsupportedOperationException
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HIVE-27298
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-27298
> Project: Hive
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: John Sherman
> Priority: Major
>
> The intent of HIVE-25005 and AbstractThriftHiveMetastore class was to provide
> default implementation for every HMS thrift method that throws
> UnsupportedOperationException.
> However - HIVE-25005 made the class abstract, so as a result there are a
> variety of HMS service methods that are not implemented in
> AbstractThriftHiveMetastore.
> We should either:
> a) remove abstract from the class definition AbstractThriftHiveMetastore
> or
> b) add a new class that is not abstract.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
