Mailing-List: contact hdfs-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of todd@cloudera.com designates
 209.85.215.52 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CADdVdVH+h7XmnR82VUN2D=n=v6ZeJF3ho1Kf5wCDx46DB5HkPw@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CA+qbEUO8JkTugwkND9zzTyfB338PW2oJZ9XfLFW98pkjKGXCTg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADY20s7v6BMhu0E2npwSkLntDxi7EP6V7ZKpsZS0yedNggXo-w@mail.gmail.com>
 <1361390182.5901.YahooMailNeo@web125703.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
 <1361401264.85659.YahooMailNeo@web125704.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
 <CADY20s42yCdG7XymM2fALekH7hqUUj7mjBSaVQYGNif7ExVi+A@mail.gmail.com>
 <1361401736.24828.YahooMailNeo@web125701.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
 <CADY20s5zYVwCigxHd1n4VUUX9ZCwvYQ6q1airNGOtVz=_4wNrA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADdVdVFBD6uTpx80x_3fzP5jOuOJMRjc8uZoeK7oUbCT7-u7tw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADY20s4ymhy62Mk+RD2XbGM6i3LqLSv4TtXM587QQnFzxU03mQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADdVdVH+h7XmnR82VUN2D=n=v6ZeJF3ho1Kf5wCDx46DB5HkPw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Todd Lipcon <todd@cloudera.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2013 16:12:08 -0800
Message-ID: 
 <CADY20s7HNL8eRSFwb6HO5_7y3-FoAzLr_0Nmht5yWeLooomL2g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: VOTE: HDFS-347 merge
To: hdfs-dev@hadoop.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Suresh Srinivas <suresh@hortonworks.com> wrote:
>
> HDFS-347 does not clearly state old short circuit will be removed any where
> in the jira or design. If this was made clear in the jira, this discussion
> would
> have happened much earlier than now.
>
> You seem to be taking the comments I am making the wrong way. I am
> supportive of this work. In fact as you see some of us have spent time
> testing this work and have reviewed the code.

The patches even going back as far as last September have all removed
the old code path. I sort of assumed that, if you are taking time to
review the patches, you would have noticed this... additionally,
Colin's comments on the JIRA said as much... eg:

 "The old RPC is now deprecated and will always throw an
AccessControlException, so that older clients will fall back to remote
reads."
"BlockReaderLocal: simpler implementation that uses raw FileChannel
objects. We don't need to cache anything, or make RPCs to the
DataNode."

from his 10/1/2012 patch upload. So, any patch you might have looked
at since then would have clearly removed the old code path.

-Todd
-- 
Todd Lipcon
Software Engineer, Cloudera