elek commented on a change in pull request #2089:
URL: https://github.com/apache/ozone/pull/2089#discussion_r607987037



##########
File path: 
hadoop-hdds/common/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hdds/client/StandaloneReplicationConfig.java
##########
@@ -0,0 +1,72 @@
+/**
+ * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
+ * or more contributor license agreements.  See the NOTICE file
+ * distributed with this work for additional information
+ * regarding copyright ownership.  The ASF licenses this file
+ * to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
+ * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
+ * with the License.  You may obtain a copy of the License at
+ *
+ *     http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ *
+ * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
+ * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
+ * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
+ * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
+ * limitations under the License.
+ */
+
+package org.apache.hadoop.hdds.client;
+
+import org.apache.hadoop.hdds.protocol.proto.HddsProtos.ReplicationFactor;
+import org.apache.hadoop.hdds.protocol.proto.HddsProtos.ReplicationType;
+
+import java.util.Objects;
+
+/**
+ * Replication configuration for STANDALONE replication.
+ */
+public class StandaloneReplicationConfig implements ReplicationConfig {
+
+  private final ReplicationFactor replicationFactor;
+
+  public StandaloneReplicationConfig(ReplicationFactor replicationFactor) {

Review comment:
       I think even have RATIS/ONE is a valid option. But I agree, it's quite 
confusing.
   
   This is something what we can start to fix together with EC as we need to 
modify the client to define the replication config based on the replication 
type. For example in case of `replicationType=EC` the `3:2` can be a valid 
replication config, while `replicationType=STANDALONE` we may accept only `ONE` 
or `ONE/THREE`.
   
   I think this kind of validation is definitely something what we should do... 




-- 
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]

Reply via email to