[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10994?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15643174#comment-15643174
]
Kai Zheng commented on HDFS-10994:
----------------------------------
Not relevant to the work here, but just raising some questions by the way,
looking at the following codes:
{code}
public static final byte RS_6_3_POLICY_ID = 0;
public static final byte RS_3_2_POLICY_ID = 1;
public static final byte RS_6_3_LEGACY_POLICY_ID = 2;
+ public static final byte XOR_2_1_POLICY_ID = 3;
{code}
* Suggest we start the {{POLICY_ID}} from 1 instead of 0, to avoid some
unexpected errors in codes since 0 is default value for integer variables. I
had discussed offline with [~Sammi] about this and the idea sounds good so far.
* Maybe we can remove related {{LEGACY_POLICY_ID}} as [~andrew.wang] commented
elsewhere we don't need to use any legacy policies in HDFS side, though I want
to keep the legacy coders in Hadoop side.
How would you think? Maybe [~andrew.wang] and [~zhz] could also give some
comments? Thanks. If sounds good to do these, separate issue would be good.
> Support an XOR policy XOR-2-1-64k in HDFS
> -----------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-10994
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-10994
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: erasure-coding
> Affects Versions: 3.0.0-alpha1
> Reporter: SammiChen
> Assignee: SammiChen
> Labels: hdfs-ec-3.0-must-do
> Attachments: HDFS-10994-v1.patch, HDFS-10994-v2.patch,
> HDFS-10994-v3.patch
>
>
> So far, "hdfs erasurecode" command supports three policies,
> RS-DEFAULT-3-2-64k, RS-DEFAULT-6-3-64k and RS-LEGACY-6-3-64k. This task is
> going to add XOR-2-1-64k policy to this command.
--
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
