hadoop-hdfs-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Junping Du (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (HDFS-11431) hadoop-hdfs-client JAR does not include ConfiguredFailoverProxyProvider
Date Fri, 17 Mar 2017 00:04:41 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-11431?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15929210#comment-15929210

Junping Du commented on HDFS-11431:

bq. I want to target HDFS-11538 at 2.9.0 and 3.0.0-alpha3
Sure. Add back 2.9.0 to HDFS-11538.

bq. but if HDFS-11431 stays in branch-2, then committing HDFS-11538 to branch-2 also requires
reverting HDFS-11431, and it wouldn't for trunk. It makes tracking what's where more complicated.
We want to revert HDFS-11431 from trunk because it cause build failure. We don't want to revert
HDFS-11431 from branch-2 because it works (even like a hack way as your said). I would like
branch-2 to keep in a safe place even adding a bit more effort to tracking differences between
branch-2 and trunk.

bq. That's not possible here since HDFS-11431 doesn't work for trunk. Which is why I suggested
the above course of action.
Agree. That's why we should have one patch for branch-2/branch-2.8 and have a different patch
for trunk later.

bq. Like I said before too, since 2.9.0 isn't imminently being released, I'd prefer the default
action be "fix HDFS-13715" than "maintain the hack of HDFS-11431". It's also easy to revisit
this when 2.9.0 is closer to an RC.
I don't see HDFS-13715 will get immediately fixed in short term also - it even haven't get
any assignee yet. 

My key points here:
1. HDFS-13715 is somethings TBD, for branch-2. better to have HDFS-11431 patch than nothing.
2. HDFS-13715 is not a blocker but something nice to have for 2.9. As I mentioned earlier,
the whole feature to make hdfs-client jar thinner is not a must given many features on 2.9
are also in pipeline.
3. If you really think tracking the revert of this patch (when we have HDFS-13715) is a big
problem, then we could file a separated JIRA and mark that one as a blocker for 2.9 to revisit
reverting patch here when we are in RC stage.

Make sense?

> hadoop-hdfs-client JAR does not include ConfiguredFailoverProxyProvider
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: HDFS-11431
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-11431
>             Project: Hadoop HDFS
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: build, hdfs-client
>    Affects Versions: 2.8.0, 3.0.0-alpha3
>            Reporter: Steven Rand
>            Assignee: Steven Rand
>            Priority: Blocker
>              Labels: maven
>             Fix For: 2.8.0
>         Attachments: HDFS-11431-branch-, HDFS-11431-branch-
> The {{hadoop-hdfs-client-2.8.0.jar}} file does include the {{ConfiguredFailoverProxyProvider}}
class. This breaks client applications that use this class to communicate with the active
NameNode in an HA deployment of HDFS.

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

To unsubscribe, e-mail: hdfs-issues-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: hdfs-issues-help@hadoop.apache.org

View raw message