[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-14284?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16937146#comment-16937146
]
Íñigo Goiri commented on HDFS-14284:
------------------------------------
{quote}
do we have any advantage of having a RouterIOException, rather than directly
calling super(msg + "from" + routerId); in the new constructors?
{quote}
It is easier to handle from the client side.
If we know is a subtype of RouterIOException we can just do getRouterId()
instead of having to parse messages.
I think is a better design overall.
> RBF: Log Router identifier when reporting exceptions
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HDFS-14284
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-14284
> Project: Hadoop HDFS
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Reporter: Íñigo Goiri
> Assignee: hemanthboyina
> Priority: Major
> Attachments: HDFS-14284.001.patch
>
>
> The typical setup is to use multiple Routers through
> ConfiguredFailoverProxyProvider.
> In a regular HA Namenode setup, it is easy to know which NN was used.
> However, in RBF, any Router can be the one reporting the exception and it is
> hard to know which was the one.
> We should have a way to identify which Router/Namenode was the one triggering
> the exception.
> This would also apply with Observer Namenodes.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: hdfs-issues-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: hdfs-issues-h...@hadoop.apache.org
