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

Switch to Threaded View
Accumulo >> mail # dev >> client config files


Copy link to this message
-
Re: client config files
On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 3:24 PM, Michael Berman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I believe it is an implementation overlap.  Both ZKInstance and the
> master-tablet thrift connections get created in ThriftUtil.getClient().
>  Higher up in the stack, in both paths, we have access to an Instance from
> which to draw configuration (with getConfiguration()).  In one case, it's a
> ZKInstance with a degenerate AccumuloConfiguration, and in the other case
> it's an HDFSInstance with a site.xml-backed configuration, but the thrift
> stack makes no distinction.  It seems silly to me to introduce a
> distinction all the way down the stack just so we can have two different
> config sources (which have many of the same flags).  Unless we were going
> to implement it as a ThriftConnectionConfiguration interface with named
> methods that both AccumuloConfiguration and ClientConfiguration could
> implement...but that would be a big departure from the Property enum
> configuration model.
>

Interesting point.  Something else to consider, the client API is used
extensively on the server side to read and write to metadata table.

>
>
> On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 2:29 PM, Joey Echeverria <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Yeah, I agree. Consistency with Hadoop here is probably not that
> valuable.
> >
> > -Joey
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 2:28 PM, Keith Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Joey Echeverria <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> I generally prefer properties files to XML, but there may be a
> argument
> > >> for reusing Hadoop's SSL configuration system which is XML based.
> > >>
> > >
> > > I also prefer prefer properties files over XML.   The only reason I can
> > > think that we might want to use XML is for consistency with Hadoop and
> > > Accumulo server side config.  But it does not seem like a very
> compelling
> > > reason, its not like it prop files are hard to use once you realize you
> > > need to use them.
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> -Joey
> > >> —
> > >> Sent from Mailbox for iPhone
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Christopher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > ^ Another reason I like commons-configuration here is for
> > >> > property-interpolation with HierarchicalConfiguration.
> > >> > --
> > >> > Christopher L Tubbs II
> > >> > http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
> > >> > On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Christopher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > >> >> I absolutely DO think they should be combined in a properties file
> > >> >> located in $HOME/.accumulo/config
> > >> >> I absolutely DO NOT think this client configuration should be
> > >> >> exclusive to the shell, and I absolutely DO NOT think it should be
> > >> >> XML.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> I would love to see all our clients/client code use
> > >> >> commons-configuration to hold properties from the properties file,
> so
> > >> >> that only a --config parameter is needed (with reasonable defaults,
> > so
> > >> >> even that is not absolutely necessary). I also think that every
> > >> >> property that can exist in the file should be possible to override
> on
> > >> >> the command-line. I personally prefer to use system properties,
> using
> > >> >> commons-configuration's HierarchicalConfiguration, but jcommander
> may
> > >> >> make it easier to do the same thing in a slightly different way.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> --
> > >> >> Christopher L Tubbs II
> > >> >> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 12:25 PM, Michael Berman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >>> As part of SSL, we need to introduce configuration so accumulo
> > clients
> > >> >>> (such as ZooKeeperInstance) can find trust stores.  It seems like
> > this
> > >> has
> > >> >>> a lot in common with shell config files in ACCUMULO-1397.  Do
> people
> > >> think
> > >> >>> these should be combined, or should the shell have its own
> separate
> > >> config?
> > >> >>>  I was imagining a simple java .properties-style key=value list.