[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-12910?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15200511#comment-15200511
]
Chris Douglas commented on HADOOP-12910:
----------------------------------------
bq. calling this a FileSystem sort of underscores that FileContext might as
well get tossed since not even Hadoop people bother to use it, despite being a
better defined API.
This is an interesting angle. While {{FileContext}} may offer clearer
semantics, it offered no functionality beyond {{FileSystem}}. Would it be
easier/clearer to implement async functionality in {{FileContext}}? If so, that
might give users an incentive to use it. We don't need a third API...
> Add new FileSystem API to support asynchronous method calls
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HADOOP-12910
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-12910
> Project: Hadoop Common
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: fs
> Reporter: Tsz Wo Nicholas Sze
> Assignee: Xiaobing Zhou
>
> Add a new API, namely FutureFileSystem (or AsynchronousFileSystem, if it is a
> better name). All the APIs in FutureFileSystem are the same as FileSystem
> except that the return type is wrapped by Future, e.g.
> {code}
> //FileSystem
> public boolean rename(Path src, Path dst) throws IOException;
> //FutureFileSystem
> public Future<Boolean> rename(Path src, Path dst) throws IOException;
> {code}
> Note that FutureFileSystem does not extend FileSystem.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
