elek commented on pull request #1973: URL: https://github.com/apache/ozone/pull/1973#issuecomment-795110749
> Won't we need to propagate the replication index in almost every message and API where the container ID is being passed? This is going to be a huge change. No, we won't need it. That's one reason why I am against bit masking. For example for OM the instance id should be fully opaque and even for internal SCM container grouping it's not required. Other reasons are explained in the attached design document at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-3816 Until now, I have strong concerns about the bitmasking approach but others (including Uma) said that but approach fine with them, so this seems to be Less Common Denominator. Yesterday we discussed this with @swagle: as the majority of this patch is not about container instance id but about `ReplicationConfig`, so I am moving out the instance id from the patch to a separated discussion. Let's move this discussion to there. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
