optimize mount logic && fix calculating ufs total size for JindoRuntime #4274
Conversation
Signed-off-by: trafalgarzzz <trafalgarz@outlook.com>
Signed-off-by: trafalgarzzz <trafalgarz@outlook.com>
Signed-off-by: trafalgarzzz <trafalgarz@outlook.com>
Signed-off-by: trafalgarzzz <trafalgarz@outlook.com>
…ing `dataset.spec.mounts[*].path` Signed-off-by: trafalgarzzz <trafalgarz@outlook.com>
Signed-off-by: trafalgarzzz <trafalgarz@outlook.com>
| err = fileUitls.Mount(mountPathInJindo, mount.MountPoint) | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| return err | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
A corner case of backward incompatibility is not handled here. Previous implementation allows users to define mount.Path without a prefix "/", and JindoEngine passes mount.Path to JindoFileUtils.Mount(). Inside JindoFileUtils.Mount(), the function automatically add a prefix "/" to mount.Path and try to mount on it.
That is to say, if a user used to set Dataset.spec.mounts[*].path to a string without a prefix "/", he or she may see different behavior before and after this PR is merged. For example:
apiVersion: data.fluid.io/v1alpha1
kind: Dataset
metadata:
name: demo2
spec:
placement: Shared
accessModes:
- ReadOnlyMany
mounts:
mountPoint: <mountPoint>
name: demo2 # After this pr is merged, mountPoint is mounted to /demo2
path: mybucket # Before this pr is merged, mountPoint is mounted to /mybucket
Signed-off-by: trafalgarzzz <trafalgarz@outlook.com>
Signed-off-by: trafalgarzzz <trafalgarz@outlook.com>
|
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: cheyang The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
Ⅰ. Describe what this PR does
Code changes in this PR:
UFSPathBuilderto make it reused by all the cache systems with a Unified Namespace. (i.e. Alluxio, GooseFS and JindoFS)spec.mounts[].pathwith JindoRuntime #4273Ⅱ. Does this pull request fix one issue?
fixes #4273
Ⅲ. List the added test cases (unit test/integration test) if any, please explain if no tests are needed.
Ⅳ. Describe how to verify it
Ⅴ. Special notes for reviews
There is a corner case that backward incompatibility may happen in this PR. Please have a loot at my comment below for more information.