Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
Kafka >> mail # dev >> Kafka/Hadoop consumers and producers


Copy link to this message
-
Re: Kafka/Hadoop consumers and producers
If the Hadoop consumer/producers use-case will remain relevant for Kafka
(I assume it will), it would make sense to have the core components (kafka
input/output format at least) as part of Kafka so that it could be built,
tested and versioned together to maintain compatibility.
This would also make it easier to build custom MR jobs on top of Kafka,
rather than having to decouple stuff from Camus.
Also it would also be less confusing for users at least when starting
using Kafka.

Camus could use those instead of providing it's own.

This being said we did some work on the consumer side (0.8 and the new(er)
MR API).
We could probably try to rewrite them to use Camus or fix Camus or
whatever, but please consider this alternative as well.

Thanks,
Cosmin

On 7/3/13 11:06 AM, "Sam Meder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>I think it makes sense to kill the hadoop consumer/producer code in
>Kafka, given, as you said, Camus and the simplicity of the Hadoop
>producer.
>
>/Sam
>
>On Jul 2, 2013, at 5:01 PM, Jay Kreps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> We currently have a contrib package for consuming and producing messages
>> from mapreduce (
>>
>>https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=kafka.git;a=tree;f=contrib;h=e5
>>3e1fb34893e733b10ff27e79e6a1dcbb8d7ab0;hb=HEAD
>> ).
>>
>> We keep running into problems (e.g. KAFKA-946) that are basically due to
>> the fact that the Kafka committers don't seem to mostly be Hadoop
>> developers and aren't doing a good job of maintaining this code
>>(keeping it
>> tested, improving it, documenting it, writing tutorials, getting it
>>moved
>> over to the more modern apis, getting it working with newer Hadoop
>> versions, etc).
>>
>> A couple of options:
>> 1. We could try to get someone in the Kafka community (either a current
>> committer or not) who would adopt this as their baby (it's not much
>>code).
>> 2. We could just let Camus take over this functionality. They already
>>have
>> a more sophisticated consumer and the producer is pretty minimal.
>>
>> So are there any people who would like to adopt the current Hadoop
>>contrib
>> code?
>>
>> Conversely would it be possible to provide the same or similar
>> functionality in Camus and just delete these?
>>
>> -Jay
>