Xushaohong commented on pull request #2622: URL: https://github.com/apache/ozone/pull/2622#issuecomment-916020754
> > > LGTM, can we do similar change for OM also? > > > > > > @bharatviswa504 > > OM uses OmNodeId as RaftPeerID, such as "om1" "om2" "om3 ", while SCM use scmUUID as RaftPeerID, and thus the log trace could be confusing for finding the right SCM node. > > Right now the OM side will print NodeId. > > I am wondering the followings: > > > > 1. should we unifiy the RaftPeerId usage for OM and SCM ? (obviously UUID is better for indicating the physical node) > > 2. after that we could unify the pattern the getting om/scm roles return > > You are right, I missed that we use node id as raft peer id in OM, and which is now already shown.. > > Lets not go the route of peerID unification, as if we want to do we need to consider fresh/old installation. > > Where in fresh installations we can generate UUIDS, and old we should we should have as it is. Do you mean that the unification needs some concern about compatibility? Because someone may have already set up the cluster. Actually what I concern about is what if om nodes vary, such as from ABC to ABD, the corresponding log only shows abstract node name instead of specific UUID pointing to the specific node. This is the disadvantage. -- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
