Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
HBASE-26214 Introduce a ConnectionRegistryEndpoint interface - #3613
Merged
Conversation
Apache-HBase
commented
Aug 21, 2021
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
Apache-HBase
commented
Aug 21, 2021
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
Apache-HBase
commented
Aug 21, 2021
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
Apache-HBase
commented
Aug 21, 2021
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
Apache-HBase
commented
Aug 21, 2021
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
Apache-HBase
commented
Aug 21, 2021
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
Apache-HBase
commented
Aug 23, 2021
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
Apache-HBase
commented
Aug 23, 2021
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
Apache-HBase
commented
Aug 23, 2021
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
| * Define the necessary method for carrying {@code ClientMetaService}. | ||
| */ | ||
| @InterfaceAudience.Private | ||
| public interface ConnectionRegistryEndpoint { |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can't you just do, this doesn't work for any reason?
public interface ServerConnectionRegistry extends ConnectionRegistry {}
HRegionServer implements ServerConnectionRegistry {
setupConnection(this);
}
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think having two interfaces that look very much alike is only adding to the confusion of the code readers.
ContributorAuthor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a prior work for undoing HMaster extends HRegionServer. If HMaster does not extends HRegionServer, then it can not use RegionServerRegistry any more. So I agree with you that in the current code it is not necessary to do this refactoring, but I think it is also no big harm? If we could land this first, the final patch for HBASE-25288 could be smaller. But anyway, I respect your decision, if you do not think this is good to land, I’m OK that we just close this one and include this patch in the final patch for HBASE-25288.
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I agree that we should land this (thanks for your other patch btw). All I'm saying is perhaps we could do this refactor without creating another new interface ConnectionRegistryEndpoint that looks exactly like ConnectionRegistry? (like I mentioned in my first comment, pasting again below). This seems simpler than your patch, right, you can use 'this' instance as the registry object in both HMaster and HRegionServer, don't have to construct something explicit? or did I miss something?
public interface ServerConnectionRegistry extends ConnectionRegistry {}
HMaster implements ServerConnectionRegistry {
<Implement master based registry server side>
}
HRegionServer implements ServerConnectionRegistry {
<Implement RegionServerRegistry server side here>
}
ContributorAuthor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
OK, got it. Let me have a try. Was wondering that returning a CompletableFuture at server side while there is no actual asynchronous in code is a bit strange, but seems no big real harm.
ContributorAuthor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh, I know why I introduce a special interface then, we need to use these methods in RSRpcServices and MasterRpcServices too, to return these information to connection registry running at client side.
It will be a bit strange that, we get a CompletableFuture which is not async actually...
WDYT? You can take a look at the code in RSRpcService.
Apache-HBase
commented
Aug 24, 2021
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
Apache-HBase
commented
Aug 24, 2021
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
Apache-HBase
commented
Aug 24, 2021
💔 -1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
Apache9
commented
Aug 25, 2021
ContributorAuthor
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
No description provided.