[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10524?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15331888#comment-15331888
]
Bob Hansen commented on HDFS-10524:
-----------------------------------
[~James C]: Good catch on the future/tuple thing.
I would respectfully disagree about having redundant parameter checking. If
it's not a performance or maintenance burden, defence in depth against future
stupidity is a Good Thing.
[~anatoli.shein] - Are permissions of 01777 valid for Hadoop? While it's valid
in POSIX-land, I think in Hadoop-land, the maximum value is 0777.
In NameNodeOperations::SetPermission, whenever we're returning an error that a
value is invalid, it is very helpful to the consumer to include the value that
made it into the code. Frequently, the value has been mangled somewhere in the
consumer or library code, and it can be a big help in debugging. In this case,
when we return that the permissions are out of range, we should include the
(octal) value of the permissions. A stringstream would be helpful in
constructing the error message.
> libhdfs++: Implement chmod and chown
> ------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-10524
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10524
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: hdfs-client
> Reporter: Anatoli Shein
> Assignee: Anatoli Shein
> Attachments: HDFS-10524.HDFS-8707.000.patch
>
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: hdfs-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: hdfs-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org
