Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[BEAM-1856]HDFSFileSink class do not use the same configuration in master thread and slave thread. #2399

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

wypb
Copy link
Contributor

@wypb wypb commented Apr 1, 2017

As described in BEAM-1856 HDFSFileSink class do not use the same configuration in master thread and slave thread.

@wypb wypb changed the title [BEAM-1856] [BEAM-1856]HDFSFileSink class do not use the same configuration in master thread and slave thread. Apr 1, 2017
some comment
@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.01%) to 70.145% when pulling 48433aa on 397090770:master into ea33e33 on apache:master.

@asfbot
Copy link

asfbot commented Apr 1, 2017

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage decreased (-0.003%) to 70.132% when pulling 48433aa on 397090770:master into ea33e33 on apache:master.

@asfbot
Copy link

asfbot commented Apr 1, 2017

Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://builds.apache.org/job/beam_PreCommit_Java_MavenInstall/9047/
--none--

Copy link
Member

@davorbonaci davorbonaci left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks good to me, but perhaps @jbonofre or @ssisk have more opinions.

R: @jbonofre @ssisk

@jbonofre
Copy link
Member

jbonofre commented Apr 2, 2017

A first glance on it: it looks good. I'm testing on couple of pipeline dealing with HDFS to be double check.

Copy link
Member

@jbonofre jbonofre left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, I gonna merge.

@asfgit asfgit closed this in f87597e Apr 6, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants