Jean-Daniel Cryans 2013-07-01, 20:55
Another option is to remove experimental configurations from
hbase-default.xml and maybe add a section to the manual that lists them or
at least mentions that configurations found in code but not in
hbase-default means 'no user serviceable parts inside', YMMV?
On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 1:55 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Hey devs,
> I'd like to engage the community in a discussion about how we can
> better identify configurations that are considered experimental.
> The current situation is that we usually don't talk about them too
> much and users will find them while googling, reading the code or
> hbase-defaults.xml. In the latter, we have configs that are marked as
> experimental in their description. For example in 0.94 we have:
> The amount of off heap space to be allocated towards the experimental
> off heap cache. If you desire the cache to be disabled, simply set
> value to 0.
> Discussing with the other devs here, we thought we could use a simple
> prefix to identify those configs so that it's really obvious that you
> may be getting into unknown territory. For example:
> hbase.offheapcache.percentage => experimental.hbase.offheapcache.percentage
> A bunch of configs will have to be renamed like that, and for backward
> compatibility we'll still have to accept both versions until they
> graduate from being experimental but only document the one with the
> prefix in hbase-defaults and the reference manual.
> For the new experimental configurations, we should just have the
> version with the "experimental." prefix until it becomes
> Does that sound like a plan? I'm open to suggestions.
Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)
Jean-Daniel Cryans 2013-07-01, 21:18
Andrew Purtell 2013-07-01, 21:29
Enis Söztutar 2013-07-01, 23:13