ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrak...@apache.org>
Subject Re: IgfsHadoopFileSystemWrapper naming.
Date Fri, 27 Feb 2015 12:52:59 GMT
Now I am even more confused. Why do we have IgniteFs and IGFS APIs? What is
the point of having Igfs? What is the difference between the two?

D.

On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 4:11 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <vozerov@gridgain.com>
wrote:

> My proposal can be found above:
> > 1) *Igfs* is left as is - this is base interface;
> > 2) IgniteFS is renamed to "*IgniteIgfs*", meaning that this is Ignite's
> implementation of IGFS;
> > 3) IgfsHadoopFileSystemWrapper is renamed to "*HadoopIgfs*", meaning that
> this another IGFS implementation which works over Hadoop FileSystem;
> > 4) IgfsHadoopFileSystem is renamed to *IgniteFileSystem*, meaning that
> this is Ignite's implementation of Hadoop FileSystem API.
>
> With such namings we will clearly indicate tow things:
> - Everything, what ends with "Igfs" is IGFS implementation (IgniteIgfs -
> our in-memory impl, HadoopIgfs - another impl working over Hadoop
> FileSystem);
> - Everything, what has "FileSystem" in name is Hadoop FileSystem
> implementation (IgniteFileSystem - *Ignite*'s implementation of
> *FileSystem*
> ).
>
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 8:44 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <dsetrakyan@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Something definitely smells about the naming here. It is vague and
> > confusing. If it is only used as a secondary file system configuration,
> > maybe we should name it as such.
> >
> > Can you propose another name?
> >
> > D.
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 12:39 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <vozerov@gridgain.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > This wrapper is one of Igfs implementations. If user want to configure
> > > secondary Igfs which is backed by Hadoop FileSystem, he should create
> > that
> > > "wrapper" and set it as "secondaryFIleSystem" in "IgfsConfiguration".
> > >
> > > On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 8:32 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <
> > dsetrakyan@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Sounds like something is wrong. I am still not clear why should our
> > users
> > > > even know about the wrapper. Can you please explain?
> > > >
> > > > D.
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 8:56 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <
> vozerov@gridgain.com
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > IgfsHadoopFileSystem is implementation of FileSystem (Hadoop
> > > interface).
> > > > > IgfsHadoopFileSystemWrapper is implementation of Igfs which
> delegates
> > > > IGFS
> > > > > API calls to underlying Hadoop FileSystem.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 4:39 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <
> > > > dsetrakyan@apache.org>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Vova,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I agree that it smells. Can you explain again the difference
> > between
> > > > > > IgfsHadoopFileSystem and IgfsHadoopFileSystemWrapper?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > D.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 5:21 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <
> > > vozerov@gridgain.com
> > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > HI,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Currently we have IgfsHadoopFileSystemWrapper class whose
sole
> > > > purpose
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > to instantiate Hadoop FileSystem and delegate Igfs calls
to it.
> > We
> > > > use
> > > > > > this
> > > > > > > class to configure secondary Hadoop file system for Igfs.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It seems to me that "Wrapper" is wrong suffix here from
user
> > > > > perspective,
> > > > > > > as this is not a wrapper, but a functional unit which user
uses
> > in
> > > > > > > configuration. It does not "wraps" anything from user point
of
> > > view.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Furthermore, we do have public classes IgfsHadoopFileSystem
> which
> > > > have
> > > > > no
> > > > > > > realtion to IgfsHadoopFileSystemWrapper, what will also
confuse
> > > > users.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We need to think about another class name here. May be
> > > > > > > "IgfsHadoopFileSystemDelegator" or something like this?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Any thoughts?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Vladimir.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message