Il lun 20 mag 2019, 05:03 Sijie Guo <guosi...@gmail.com> ha scritto: > +1 from me. `Cookie` was designed for keeping the informations that is > associated with a bookie (e.g. disk layouts, bookie id and etc). > > I think it is making sense to have `FaultZoneId` stored as part of the > cookie. >
I agree. But we should take care of designing a better API for the placement policy. We are changing signatures quite often, adding parameters, changing return type.... We could also take into account the ability of adding labels/tags to bookies. Enrico > - Sijie > > On Sun, May 19, 2019 at 9:48 AM Venkateswara Rao Jujjuri < > jujj...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > In the current code, bookie to faultDomain mapping is supplied through > > different methods. Salesforce uses a script to read yaml file which > > contains racks/machines mapping. But I am wondering why can't we put this > > info in the Cookie? Assuming that these machines can never move across > > fault zones. > > > > Currently cookies contain version, Host, JourlanDirs, ledgerDirs, and > > instanceId. > > If we add faultzoneId to it, it will be always available for everyone to > > look into. > > Is there any reason why it would be a bad idea? > > > > Thanks, > > -- > > Jvrao > > --- > > First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then > > you win. - Mahatma Gandhi > > >
