elek commented on pull request #1149:
URL: https://github.com/apache/hadoop-ozone/pull/1149#issuecomment-657024565
Thanks to explain it. I understand why do you think implicit defaultFs can
be dangerous. On the other hand (as many other dangerous feature) it provides
additional flexibility as you can migrate to a new defaultFs without changing
all your app. It cab be a helpful feature even if the same feature can provide
some additional risks in some use cases.
But we couldn't change the `defaultFs` behavior of HDFS, so let's talk about
this patch.
You mentioned two concerns:
1. In case of multiple clusters is used, it's better to require an explicit
serviceId selection
2. In case of an "automatic", "magic", discovery mechanism, configuration
is present.
Fortunately this patch is independent of these problems. This patch modifies
the behavior if one (and only one) `servceId` is defined). In case of (1), at
least two `serviceId`s are defined. In case of (2) no `serviceId` is defined.
Therefore it seems to be safe to merge.
Can you please explain where do you see any risk w.r.t this patch?
----------------------------------------------------------------
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:
us...@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ozone-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: ozone-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org
