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

Switch to Threaded View
HBase, mail # dev - Review request for HBASE-7692: Ordered byte[] serialization


Copy link to this message
-
Re: Review request for HBASE-7692: Ordered byte[] serialization
Nick Dimiduk 2013-02-22, 19:37
I'm working through the code that will produce a patch placing orderly in
its own module. A question to reviewers: would you prefer I create separate
JIRA/tasks for each of the individual patches? Will that be easier to
review than dumping my squashed patch onto this ticket and asking you to
look at github? Having this broken out into multiple tickets, I would feel
better about using review board to aggregate comments.

Please advise.
Nick

On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 10:48 AM, Nick Dimiduk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 10:14 AM, Matt Corgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> >
>> > Not quite true. It makes use of Bytes and ImmutableBytesWritable from
>> > hbase-common.
>>
>> Oh, interesting.  Could we inline the code from Bytes.java and somehow get
>> rid of the ImmutableBytesWritable.  Like calling packages can add
>> ImmutableBytesWritable functionality on top if they want to?
>
>
> I'll need to do a more thorough evaluation, but a cursory glance indicates
> use of Bytes could be replaced by arraycopy. ImmutableBytesWritable is used
> mostly as a convenient wrapper over byte[], and may well
> be replaceable with Hadoop's BytesWritable.
>
> Seems like something as low level as rearranging bytes should be
>> dependency free.
>>
>
> The implementation makes heavy use of Hadoop Writables, but the
> dependencies on HBase instances are mostly convenience.
>
>  On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 10:04 AM, Nick Dimiduk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Inline.
>> >
>> > On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 10:00 AM, Matt Corgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > To nitpick a little it wouldn't quite be a sibling of hbase-client
>> > because
>> > > hbase-client depends on hbase-common and hbase-protocol while this new
>> > one
>> > > will not depend on anything.  Would hbase-server be able to see it?
>> >  Would
>> > > it basically be a standalone module being maintained by HBase?
>> > >
>> >
>> > Not quite true. It makes use of Bytes and ImmutableBytesWritable from
>> > hbase-common.
>> >
>> > Also, assuming the original Orderly library goes unmaintained and we
>> want
>> > > people to use it, this will be the primary place to get it.  Having no
>> > > dependencies on other hbase modules is important for people who want
>> to
>> > use
>> > > the Orderly library for something unrelated to hbase.  For example, a
>> web
>> > > application that logs data in this format but not directly to hbase.
>> > >
>> >
>> > Orderly has gone unmaintained. The only fork with any activity that I'm
>> > aware of is my own. I'd much rather see it gain the publicity,
>> > additional scrutiny, wider adoption than continue as a pet-project.
>> >
>> > On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Elliott Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Yep the client will be fully separated as soon as rpc changes
>> > > > are stabilized.  Until then keeping up the move patch was just too
>> > > onerous.
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 6:31 AM, Jonathan Hsieh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > Nick,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I'm +1 for it having its own module, and being a sibling of
>> > > hbase-client.
>> > > > >  I'm assuming the client stuff will happen before we release 0.96
>> > since
>> > > > it
>> > > > > has been started.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Jon.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 6:13 AM, Nick Dimiduk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > You're absolutely correct: this library introduces client-side
>> > > > > conventions
>> > > > > > and is not needed from within the HMaster or RegionServer. Is
>> > > > > > the consensus that it should reside in it's own module or be a
>> > > sibling
>> > > > to
>> > > > > > the o.a.h.hbase.client source tree? I'm a little confused by the
>> > > > current
>> > > > > > state of the modules; hbase-client looks empty while
>> > > o.a.h.hbase.client
>> > > > > > sits under hbase-server.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Thanks,
>> > > > > > Nick
>> > > > > >