[GitHub] [hudi] yuzhaojing commented on pull request #8080: [HUDI-5865] Fix table service client to instantiate with timeline server

["yuzhaojing (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>]

yuzhaojing commented on PR #8080:
URL: https://github.com/apache/hudi/pull/8080#issuecomment-1453735396

   > @yuzhaojing @xushiyan The changes to the write client are done when introducing the new table service client. Before that, based on my understanding, the inline table services running along with the regular write client share the same timeline server. So I think with the new table service client, we should still follow the same convention. Is there anything I miss? When the table service manager is used, how's the interplay between the timeline server and the table service manager?
   > 
   > cc @nsivabalan
   > 
   > Before we fully agree on the approach here, let's not merge this PR. Also, I'd like to add some tests to guard around the expected behavior, after the discussion.
   
   @yihua @danny0405 @xushiyan I'm sorry for this serious bug. I think the table service client should share the same timeline server as the regular write client. Here I think the following tests can be added to the table service client: 
   
   1. Add unit tests to confirm that the table service client has not made unexpected modifications to writeConfig.
   2. Confirm that the table service of the table service client is scheduled and executed normally.
   3. Call correctly after starting the managed service.
   
   Want to hear your thoughts and apologize again!


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscribe@hudi.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org