[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-16254?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17497809#comment-17497809
]
Owen O'Malley commented on HADOOP-16254:
----------------------------------------
[~ayushtkn] , yeah I hadn't found that jira, so thank you.
Of course, using the caller context will work, with the only major downside is
that if the user sets a caller context that is close to the limit, it could
cause bytes to get dropped. We might want to pick a shorter lead string (4
bytes?) to minimize that chance. (Or bump up the default limit by 50 bytes?)
> Add proxy address in IPC connection
> -----------------------------------
>
> Key: HADOOP-16254
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-16254
> Project: Hadoop Common
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: ipc
> Reporter: Xiaoqiao He
> Assignee: Xiaoqiao He
> Priority: Blocker
> Attachments: HADOOP-16254.001.patch, HADOOP-16254.002.patch,
> HADOOP-16254.004.patch, HADOOP-16254.005.patch, HADOOP-16254.006.patch,
> HADOOP-16254.007.patch
>
>
> In order to support data locality of RBF, we need to add new field about
> client hostname in the RPC headers of Router protocol calls.
> clientHostname represents hostname of client and forward by Router to
> Namenode to support data locality friendly. See more [RBF Data Locality
> Design|https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12965092/RBF%20Data%20Locality%20Design.pdf]
> in HDFS-13248 and [maillist
> vote|http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hadoop-common-dev/201904.mbox/%3CCAF3Ajax7hGxvowg4K_HVTZeDqC5H=3bfb7mv5sz5mgvadhv...@mail.gmail.com%3E].
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: common-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: common-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org
