Thanks for your reply Till.
I will wait a bit for other thoughts, and create JIRA and start progress if
no further objections.
Best,
tison.
Till Rohrmann <
[hidden email]> 于2019年9月30日周一 下午5:51写道：
> Hi Tison,
>
> I agree that unused HA implementations can be removed since they are dead
> code. If we should need them in the future, then we can still get them by
> going back a bit in time. Hence +1 for removing unused HA implementations.
>
> Cheers,
> Till
>
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 10:42 AM Zili Chen <
[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Any suggestion?
> >
> > IMO it is exactly inactive for quite some time, we can remove these
> > uncompleted codes at least for now and re-introduce if needed.
> >
> > Best,
> > tison.
> >
> >
> > Zili Chen <
[hidden email]> 于2019年9月27日周五 上午9:23写道：
> >
> > > Hi devs,
> > >
> > > Noticed that there are several stale & uncompleted high-availability
> > > services implementations, I
> > > start this thread in order to see whether or not we can remove them
> for a
> > > clean codebase work on
> > > the ongoing high-availability refactor effort[1].
> > >
> > > Below are all of classes I noticed.
> > >
> > > - YarnHighAvailabilityServices
> > > - AbstractYarnNonHaServices
> > > - YarnIntraNonHaMasterServices
> > > - YarnPreConfiguredMasterNonHaServices
> > > - SingleLeaderElectionService
> > > - FsNegativeRunningJobsRegistry
> > > (as well as their dedicated tests)
> > >
> > > Any suggestion?
> > > Best,
> > > tison.
> > >
> > > [1]
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-10333> > >
> >
>
Locked
