Skip to content

[Feature] refactor the connection properties #50238

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

Open
2 of 3 tasks
morningman opened this issue Apr 21, 2025 · 0 comments
Open
2 of 3 tasks

[Feature] refactor the connection properties #50238

morningman opened this issue Apr 21, 2025 · 0 comments
Labels
kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature.

Comments

@morningman
Copy link
Contributor

Search before asking

  • I had searched in the issues and found no similar issues.

Description

No response

Use case

No response

Related issues

No response

Are you willing to submit PR?

  • Yes I am willing to submit a PR!

Code of Conduct

@morningman morningman added the kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. label Apr 21, 2025
CalvinKirs added a commit that referenced this issue Apr 22, 2025
…ith Azure Support (#50220)

### What problem does this PR solve?

Issue Number: #50238

Abstracted the endpoint matching and region extraction logic into a common utility method
For object storage implementations compatible with the S3 protocol, the implementation class only needs to handle endpoint matching, while the parent class can take care of extracting the region and validating the endpoint. This approach helps eliminate a lot of redundant code.↳

Add Azure blob support

- Abstracted the endpoint matching and region extraction logic into a
common utility method

For object storage implementations compatible with the S3 protocol, the
implementation class only needs to handle endpoint matching, while the
parent class can take care of extracting the region and validating the
endpoint. This approach helps eliminate a lot of redundant code.

- Add Azure blob support

### Release note

None

### Check List (For Author)

- Test <!-- At least one of them must be included. -->
    - [ ] Regression test
    - [x] Unit Test
    - [ ] Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)
    - [ ] No need to test or manual test. Explain why:
- [ ] This is a refactor/code format and no logic has been changed.
        - [ ] Previous test can cover this change.
        - [ ] No code files have been changed.
        - [ ] Other reason <!-- Add your reason?  -->

- Behavior changed:
    - [x] No.
    - [ ] Yes. <!-- Explain the behavior change -->

- Does this need documentation?
    - [x] No.
- [ ] Yes. <!-- Add document PR link here. eg:
apache/doris-website#1214 -->

### Check List (For Reviewer who merge this PR)

- [ ] Confirm the release note
- [ ] Confirm test cases
- [ ] Confirm document
- [ ] Add branch pick label <!-- Add branch pick label that this PR
should merge into -->
morningman pushed a commit that referenced this issue Apr 23, 2025
### What problem does this PR solve?
Issue Number: #50238
####  Background
The current metastore configuration parameters are tightly coupled and
difficult to maintain, with inconsistent mappings from user input. This
complexity has led to confusion and reduced extensibility.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant