[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-1455?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16824312#comment-16824312 ]
Arpit Agarwal commented on HDDS-1455: ------------------------------------- Thanks for filing this [~eyang]. I think both suggestions make sense. The reason for the different prefix is that SCM and DataNodes are providing a separate service called HDDS, which is used by OM service that provides Ozone on top of HDDS. But from a usability perspective it may be better to have a single prefix. cc [~ajayydv], [~anu]. > Inconsistent naming convention with Ozone Kerberos configuration > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: HDDS-1455 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDDS-1455 > Project: Hadoop Distributed Data Store > Issue Type: Sub-task > Reporter: Eric Yang > Priority: Major > > In SetupSecureOzone.md, the naming convention for keytab files are different > from code. > {code} > hdds.scm.http.kerberos.keytab > ozone.om.http.kerberos.keytab > {code} > In ozone-default.xml, it is looking for: > {code} > hdds.scm.http.kerberos.keytab > ozone.om.http.kerberos.keytab.file > {code} > For the non http version of keytab, they are branded as: > {code} > hdds.scm.kerberos.keytab.file > ozone.om.kerberos.keytab.file > {code} > It is best to shorten the name to remove .file suffix from the code to be > consistent with Hadoop naming convention. The second nitpick is hdds and > ozone prefix. Is there a good reason to have distinct prefix for both that > work closely together? How about hadoop.ozone prefix? From usability point > of view, the current prefix are very confusing. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005) --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: hdfs-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: hdfs-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org