[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEZ-373?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13995645#comment-13995645
]
Bikas Saha commented on TEZ-373:
--------------------------------
The patch looks close. I may not have been clear in my original comment. So
apologies for that. The current patch helps me clarify it.
Instead of {code}+public class TezUserPayload {
+ private final UserPayload payload;
+
+ public TezUserPayload(UserPayload payload) {
+ Preconditions.checkNotNull(payload, "payload is null");
+ this.payload = payload;
+ }
+
+ public UserPayload getProto() {
+ return payload;
+ }
+}{code}
How about we do {code}+public class TezUserPayload {
+ private final byte[] null;
+
+ public TezUserPayload(byte[] userPayload) {
+ Preconditions.checkNotNull(payload, "payload is null");
+ this.payload = payload;
+ }
+
+ public byte[] getPayload() {
+ return payload;
+ }
+}{code}
The creation of a TezUserPayload happens during 1) at the API boundary when
user passes in the byte[] payload 2) at the RPC boundary when a RPC data is
converted to objects. TezUserPayload is converted to UserPayload when
serializing before the outgoing RPC call. These 2 operations can use
TezUserPayload DAGTypeConverter.convertToTezUserPayload(UserPayload) and
UserPayload DAGTypeConverter.fromTezUserPayload. Does this make sense? Lets
discuss if this is cleaner wrt the code.
In this case, IMO we should be returning a TezUserPayload object with empty
byte array. Because we need to pass around a valid object that will then
deliver a null payload (since the user did not set a payload)
{code}+ public static TezUserPayload convertTezUserPayloadFromByte(@Nullable
byte[] payload) {
+ if (payload == null) {
+ return null;
+ }{code}
> Create UserPayload class
> ------------------------
>
> Key: TEZ-373
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TEZ-373
> Project: Apache Tez
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Reporter: Bikas Saha
> Assignee: Tsuyoshi OZAWA
> Labels: newbie
> Attachments: TEZ-373.1.patch, TEZ-373.2.patch, TEZ-373.3.patch,
> TEZ-373.4.patch, TEZ-373.5.patch, TEZ-373.6.patch, TEZ-373.7.patch,
> TEZ-373.8.patch
>
>
> Currently Tez allows user payload to be passed as byte[]. Within Tez code is
> hard to understand where byte[] is userPayload and where is not user payload.
> If we create a TezUserPayload class that contains byte[] as a member then its
> much easier to search and identify in code.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
