Andrew Wong has posted comments on this change. ( 
http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/14221 )

Change subject: KUDU-2069 p3: add RPC endpoint for maintenance mode
......................................................................


Patch Set 2:

(12 comments)

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/14221/2/src/kudu/master/master.proto
File src/kudu/master/master.proto:

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/14221/2/src/kudu/master/master.proto@816
PS2, Line 816: enum StateChange
> Do we need to use the same way of assigning the default values for this enu
Done


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/14221/2/src/kudu/master/master.proto@825
PS2, Line 825:   // The tserver UUID on which to apply the state change.
> Nit: add an empty line before.
Done


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/14221/2/src/kudu/master/master.proto@988
PS2, Line 988: AuthorizeSuperUser
> nit: Can you mention this requires super user privilege, as it is for admin
Done


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/14221/2/src/kudu/master/master_service.cc
File src/kudu/master/master_service.cc:

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/14221/2/src/kudu/master/master_service.cc@98
PS2, Line 98: DEFINE_bool(master_support_maintenance_mode, false,
> nit: maybe, add TODO about removing this after all the related patches land
Done


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/14221/2/src/kudu/master/master_service.cc@132
PS2, Line 132: the end state of the given 'change'.
> nit: update the doc -- it returns that into the output parameter, not as re
Done


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/14221/2/src/kudu/master/master_service.cc@133
PS2, Line 133: ExtractTServerStateFromChangePB
> nit: as for naming, what do you think of StateChangeToTServerState() ?
Done


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/14221/2/src/kudu/master/master_service.cc@202
PS2, Line 202:   if (!req->has_change()) {
> FWIW, the default value of a protobuf enum is its first possible value.
Done, this will be caught in StateChangeToTServerState()


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/14221/2/src/kudu/master/ts_state-test.cc
File src/kudu/master/ts_state-test.cc:

http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/14221/2/src/kudu/master/ts_state-test.cc@323
PS2, Line 323: ASSERT_FALSE(s.ok())
> Does it make sense to check for specific status code?  Or this isn't any co
Done


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/14221/2/src/kudu/master/ts_state-test.cc@323
PS2, Line 323: << s.ToString()
> nit: if s.ok() is true, not much is going to be reported by s.ToString() by
Done


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/14221/2/src/kudu/master/ts_state-test.cc@328
PS2, Line 328:   NO_FATALS(send_req_check_failed("must contain tserver state 
change"));
> IMHO, these error messages should be defined as string constants somewhere,
If it were being used multiple places in production code, I'd agree, or 
multiple places in tests, I'd agree. But I agree with others that the tests 
should be decoupled from the implementation.


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/14221/2/src/kudu/master/ts_state-test.cc@339
PS2, Line 339: resp
> Does it make sense to check for the 'error' in the response even if RPC its
Done


http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/#/c/14221/2/src/kudu/master/ts_state-test.cc@339
PS2, Line 339: ChangeTServerState
> Do we need to check the RPC is a no op when transiting tserver to maintenan
Done



--
To view, visit http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/14221
To unsubscribe, visit http://gerrit.cloudera.org:8080/settings

Gerrit-Project: kudu
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-MessageType: comment
Gerrit-Change-Id: I9d565bd745507f2511b91a96d2d446240c5406b5
Gerrit-Change-Number: 14221
Gerrit-PatchSet: 2
Gerrit-Owner: Andrew Wong <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Adar Dembo <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Alexey Serbin <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Andrew Wong <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Greg Solovyev <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Hao Hao <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Kudu Jenkins (120)
Gerrit-Comment-Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2019 20:47:12 +0000
Gerrit-HasComments: Yes

Reply via email to