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

Switch to Plain View
Flume >> mail # dev >> Questions about Morphline Solr Sink structure


+
Otis Gospodnetic 2013-11-11, 00:29
+
Otis Gospodnetic 2013-11-11, 00:42
+
Wolfgang Hoschek 2013-11-11, 19:54
+
Hari Shreedharan 2013-11-11, 20:12
+
Roshan Naik 2013-11-11, 21:34
+
Otis Gospodnetic 2013-11-11, 23:54
+
Hari Shreedharan 2013-11-12, 00:00
+
Wolfgang Hoschek 2013-11-12, 00:04
+
Roshan Naik 2013-11-12, 01:25
+
Wolfgang Hoschek 2013-11-12, 05:29
+
Otis Gospodnetic 2013-11-12, 04:56
Copy link to this message
-
Re: Questions about Morphline Solr Sink structure
Breaking backwards compat isn't an option for enterprise customers, especially if the only gain is making a bunch of names a little more pleasant.

Wolfgang.

On Nov 11, 2013, at 8:56 PM, Otis Gospodnetic wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Hm, I don't get something here.  The class name is misleading/wrong,
> no?  Why not go through the usual deprecation steps to avoid breaking
> anything during the next release and then remove the
> misnamed/misplaced classes completely?
>
> Also, I don't know enough about this code to understand fully why any
> code here would need to ship without (unit) tests...
>
> While people could use MorphlineSolrSink even if they are not using it
> with Solr, wouldn't that be a little.... messy? :)
>
> Thanks,
> Otis
> --
> Performance Monitoring * Log Analytics * Search Analytics
> Solr & Elasticsearch Support * http://sematext.com/
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 8:25 PM, Roshan Naik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> imho...would be nice if the code changes were done... but renaming it in
>> the user guide (without changing FQCNs) can be done regardless. and perhaps
>> more impt from a user perspective..
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Wolfgang Hoschek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>>
>>> Yep, the names are a bit misleading now that so much has been generalized,
>>> but whatever we do, breaking backwards compat isn't an option. Shipping a
>>> sink without tests doesn't seem compelling to me either.
>>>
>>> Taste in names aside, as far as I can see you could use this sink for ES
>>> today without any issues.
>>>
>>> Wolfgang.
>>>
>>> On Nov 11, 2013, at 4:00 PM, Hari Shreedharan wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Otis,
>>>>
>>>> I don’t mind doing any of that - but the problem is that such a change
>>> could impact backward compatibility - so we’d need to keep the stubs around
>>> even though the actual functionality might be elsewhere.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Hari
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Monday, November 11, 2013 at 3:54 PM, Otis Gospodnetic wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the info, everyone.
>>>>> Yes, I noticed after my email that Blob* classes were in the process
>>>>> of being moved.
>>>>> Here is what I feel should really be done:
>>>>>
>>>>> * get rid of ....solr.morphline package and move the code to
>>>>> ...morphpline package
>>>>> * get rid of any Solr-specific code (I guess just in the tests
>>>>> Wolfgang mentioned)
>>>>> * rename the sink to MorphlineSink
>>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>> Re loadElasticSearch() - yes, I see Wolfgang saw I opened an issue for
>>>>> that in CDK.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Otis
>>>>> --
>>>>> Performance Monitoring * Log Analytics * Search Analytics
>>>>> Solr & Elasticsearch Support * http://sematext.com/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 4:34 PM, Roshan Naik <[EMAIL PROTECTED](mailto:
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED])> wrote:
>>>>>> We should consider rename the Morphline Solr Sink to Morphline sink in
>>> the
>>>>>> docs to avoid any possibility of misleading end users.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
>>>>>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
>>> entity to
>>>>>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
>>>>>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
>>> reader
>>>>>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
>>> that
>>>>>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
>>>>>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
>>>>>> received this communication in error, please contact the sender
>>> immediately
>>>>>> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to
>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
+
Otis Gospodnetic 2013-11-12, 06:01