Details

    • Type: Sub-task
    • Status: Open
    • Priority: Major
    • Resolution: Unresolved
    • Affects Version/s: 2.8.0
    • Fix Version/s: None
    • Component/s: fs/s3
    • Labels:
      None
    • Target Version/s:

      Description

      S3a now raises exceptions on invalid rename operations, but these get lost. I plan to use them in my s3guard committer HADOOP-13786.

      Rather than just make innerRename() private, S3A could implement FileSystem.rename(final Path src, final Path dst, final Rename... options) and so have an exception-raising rename which can be called without going more into the internals.

        Issue Links

          Activity

          Hide
          stevel@apache.org Steve Loughran added a comment -

          Requirements

          1. rename/3 behaviour to be specified fully. It's better than rename/2 here.
          2. contract tests
          3. S3a to implement with contract tests
          4. have rename/2 forward to the new rename, catching IOEs and downgrading to return codes, the way it now does. Are behaviours consistent enough to do that?
          Show
          stevel@apache.org Steve Loughran added a comment - Requirements rename/3 behaviour to be specified fully. It's better than rename/2 here. contract tests S3a to implement with contract tests have rename/2 forward to the new rename, catching IOEs and downgrading to return codes, the way it now does. Are behaviours consistent enough to do that?
          Hide
          liuml07 Mingliang Liu added a comment -

          This proposal makes a lot of sense. My only concern is the FS#rename/3 is marked deprecated, and users may think we don't support this in any future.

          Show
          liuml07 Mingliang Liu added a comment - This proposal makes a lot of sense. My only concern is the FS#rename/3 is marked deprecated, and users may think we don't support this in any future.
          Hide
          stevel@apache.org Steve Loughran added a comment -

          yes. I will have to remove that marker in the process

          Show
          stevel@apache.org Steve Loughran added a comment - yes. I will have to remove that marker in the process
          Hide
          stevel@apache.org Steve Loughran added a comment -

          + rename/3 is also marked as protected; we will actually have to make it publc. ViewFS will need to implement it too.

          Show
          stevel@apache.org Steve Loughran added a comment - + rename/3 is also marked as protected; we will actually have to make it publc. ViewFS will need to implement it too.

            People

            • Assignee:
              Unassigned
              Reporter:
              stevel@apache.org Steve Loughran
            • Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              4 Start watching this issue

              Dates

              • Created:
                Updated:

                Development