-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.4k
HBASE-28484 Allow replication to different target table #5819
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
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
@@ -117,6 +121,10 @@ public Map<TableName, List<String>> getExcludeTableCFsMap() { | |||
return (Map<TableName, List<String>>) excludeTableCFsMap; | |||
} | |||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not sure what the best practice here is, but would it make sense to add a deprecated setter to ReplicationPeerConfig
?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ReplicationPeerConfig is designed to be immutable. So you'd better add a setter in the ReplicationPeerConfigBuilder.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I added this method to the builder in the initial commit. I asked this question because I noticed ReplicationPeerConfig has some deprecated setter methods. I wasn't sure if it would make sense to introduce a deprecated setter for this new field to follow the existing code, or if I should leave it out for this new field.
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
🎊 +1 overall
This message was automatically generated. |
I think we may have more patterns when replication... For example, we want to replicate a whole namespace and change the target namespace name, we want to replicate all the tables on the cluster but adding a prefix to all the table names, etc. I do not mean we should support them all in the first place, but we'd better list all the requirements first, and then see whether there is a general enough solution to support them all. So in the future, if we want to add more supports, we do not need to change bunch of existing code, as it is a big pain if we want to change existing data structures... Thanks. |
No description provided.