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

Remove unused class #17997

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 16, 2023
Merged

Remove unused class #17997

merged 1 commit into from
Aug 16, 2023

Conversation

jja725
Copy link
Contributor

@jja725 jja725 commented Aug 15, 2023

What changes are proposed in this pull request?

Remove unused class which causing problem.

2023-08-15 21:40:36,663 WARN  ChannelInitializer - Failed to initialize a channel. Closing: [id: 0xa460dfda, L:/172.31.93.123:29997 - R:/172.31.80.106:34390]
java.lang.RuntimeException: No value set for configuration key alluxio.worker.tieredstore.level0.alias
	at alluxio.conf.InstancedConfiguration.get(InstancedConfiguration.java:108)
	at alluxio.conf.InstancedConfiguration.get(InstancedConfiguration.java:100)
	at alluxio.conf.InstancedConfiguration.getString(InstancedConfiguration.java:259)
	at alluxio.conf.Configuration.getString(Configuration.java:221)
	at alluxio.DefaultStorageTierAssoc.<init>(DefaultStorageTierAssoc.java:71)
	at alluxio.worker.netty.FileWriteHandler.<init>(FileWriteHandler.java:49)
	at alluxio.emon.worker.netty.FileWriteHandlerEE.<init>(FileWriteHandlerEE.java:42)
	at alluxio.emon.worker.netty.PipelineHandlerEE.addBlockHandlerForDora(PipelineHandlerEE.java:113)
	at alluxio.emon.worker.netty.PipelineHandlerEE.initChannel(PipelineHandlerEE.java:100)
	at io.netty.channel.ChannelInitializer.initChannel(ChannelInitializer.java:129)
	at io.netty.channel.ChannelInitializer.handlerAdded(ChannelInitializer.java:112)
	at io.netty.channel.AbstractChannelHandlerContext.callHandlerAdded(AbstractChannelHandlerContext.java:1114)
	at io.netty.channel.DefaultChannelPipeline.callHandlerAdded0(DefaultChannelPipeline.java:609)
	at io.netty.channel.DefaultChannelPipeline.access$100(DefaultChannelPipeline.java:46)
	at io.netty.channel.DefaultChannelPipeline$PendingHandlerAddedTask.execute(DefaultChannelPipeline.java:1463)
	at io.netty.channel.DefaultChannelPipeline.callHandlerAddedForAllHandlers(DefaultChannelPipeline.java:1115)
	at io.netty.channel.DefaultChannelPipeline.invokeHandlerAddedIfNeeded(DefaultChannelPipeline.java:650)
	at io.netty.channel.AbstractChannel$AbstractUnsafe.register0(AbstractChannel.java:514)
	at io.netty.channel.AbstractChannel$AbstractUnsafe.access$200(AbstractChannel.java:429)
	at io.netty.channel.AbstractChannel$AbstractUnsafe$1.run(AbstractChannel.java:486)
	at io.netty.util.concurrent.AbstractEventExecutor.runTask(AbstractEventExecutor.java:174)
	at io.netty.util.concurrent.AbstractEventExecutor.safeExecute(AbstractEventExecutor.java:167)
	at io.netty.util.concurrent.SingleThreadEventExecutor.runAllTasks(SingleThreadEventExecutor.java:470)
	at io.netty.channel.nio.NioEventLoop.run(NioEventLoop.java:569)
	at io.netty.util.concurrent.SingleThreadEventExecutor$4.run(SingleThreadEventExecutor.java:997)
	at io.netty.util.internal.ThreadExecutorMap$2.run(ThreadExecutorMap.java:74)
	at java.base/java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:829)

Why are the changes needed?

fix bug

Does this PR introduce any user facing changes?

na

@yyongycy
Copy link
Contributor

has this been removed by bowen?

Copy link
Contributor

@yyongycy yyongycy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm

@jja725
Copy link
Contributor Author

jja725 commented Aug 16, 2023

alluxio-bot, merge this please

@alluxio-bot
Copy link
Contributor

merge failed:
Merge refused because pull request does not have label start with type-

@jja725 jja725 added the type-bug This issue is about a bug label Aug 16, 2023
@jja725
Copy link
Contributor Author

jja725 commented Aug 16, 2023

alluxio-bot, merge this please

@alluxio-bot alluxio-bot merged commit 1253e2b into Alluxio:main Aug 16, 2023
12 checks passed
@dbw9580
Copy link
Contributor

dbw9580 commented Aug 16, 2023

The exactly same code has been removed in #17988
So this one is an empty commit lol 1253e2b

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
type-bug This issue is about a bug
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants