Github user paul-rogers commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/drill/pull/796#discussion_r108049374
--- Diff:
exec/java-exec/src/main/java/org/apache/drill/exec/store/dfs/DrillFileSystem.java
---
@@ -89,22 +89,36 @@ public DrillFileSystem(Configuration fsConf) throws
IOException {
}
public DrillFileSystem(Configuration fsConf, OperatorStats
operatorStats) throws IOException {
- this.underlyingFs = FileSystem.get(fsConf);
+ this(fsConf, URI.create(fsConf.getRaw(FS_DEFAULT_NAME_KEY)),
operatorStats);
+ }
+
+ public DrillFileSystem(Configuration fsConf, URI Uri, OperatorStats
operatorStats) throws IOException {
+ this.underlyingFs = FileSystem.get(Uri, fsConf);
+ logger.trace("Configuration for the DrillFileSystem " +
fsConf.getRaw(FS_DEFAULT_NAME_KEY) +
+ ", underlyingFs: " + this.underlyingFs.getUri());
this.codecFactory = new CompressionCodecFactory(fsConf);
this.operatorStats = operatorStats;
+ setConf(fsConf);
--- End diff --
I think this whole code block needs more thought. DrillFileSystem derives
from the Hadoop `FileSystem` class, but we never invoke the `FileSystem`
constructor. Why? Without proper init, can we guarantee that the methods
defined in the base class actually work?
On the other hand, it seems we've reimplemented all base class methods,
basically masking the base class implementation. If that is true, why set the
config on the base class?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at [email protected] or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
