Github user zsxwing commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/10261#issuecomment-164037328
@vanzin
I saw your following comment in
https://github.com/vanzin/spark/commit/3848bf5e5bee4aa132aa001baab41dc58d39e5c5#diff-acd05d6d379b6ef6ccf36bd3db5614f6R69
```
Because the messages used to register workers and applications were one-way
messages, though, "receive" was used, and that information was not
available.
So now those messages are send using "ask", which looks a bit awkward but is
simpler than changing the RpcEnv API so that the client address is available
in the "receive" method.
```
But I don't get it.
The communication in master-worker, worker-driver and master-driver are
all in non-client mode. So for one-way messages, `RequestMessage.senderAddress`
is the RpcEnv listening address. If we maintain the address relation like this
PR, RpcEndpoint doesn't need to worry about the address issue even for
`one-way` messages. Right?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: reviews-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: reviews-h...@spark.apache.org
