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

Switch to Plain View
HBase, mail # dev - DISCUSSION: 0.96.0: Purge CoprocessorProtocol and all associated parts of this jettisoned engine?


+
Stack 2012-12-20, 21:20
+
Andrew Purtell 2012-12-20, 22:10
+
Stack 2012-12-20, 23:40
Copy link to this message
-
Re: DISCUSSION: 0.96.0: Purge CoprocessorProtocol and all associated parts of this jettisoned engine?
Andrew Purtell 2012-12-21, 00:04
I think it's good to get this out there again, it's going to be a big
change.
On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Stack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Thanks Andrew.
>
> I've actually messed up in that this issue has already been discussed back
> in September and consensus was to go with purging CoprocessorProtocol [1
> and 2].  Sorry for the noise.  Let me go  make a patch.
>
> St.Ack
>
> 1.
>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hbase-dev/201209.mbox/%3CCADfYSXTvqEu3SifyWdZCi9kKPw1Hf9EoaKVGFOCbwRpSkdaCng%40mail.gmail.com%3E
> 2. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-6895
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Andrew Purtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > > We will have to support two very different underpinnings for an exotic
> > though
> > critical feature
> >
> > I think this means supporting CoprocessorProtocol based endpoint RPC in
> > 0.94 and PB based endpoint RPC in 0.96+. If so then yes.
> >
> > Pro:
> > + Normalizes interactions over RPC with HBase. Everything speaks
> protobufs.
> >
> > The fact is HBase 0.96 has a redesigned RPC stack, and coprocessor
> > endpoints wrap RPC. This change is IMO a necessary consequence of other
> > changes we have already decided upon and committed.
> >
> > I can help out with transitions from a 0.94 world to a 0.96+ one too.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Stack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > Are folks down with purging CoprocessorProtocol in 0.96 and all of its
> > > associated machinery?
> > >
> > > For example, Andrew Purtell says "I'd be +1 with dropping
> > > CoprocessorProtocol from 0.96 and up, given all of the other
> (deliberate)
> > > incompatibilities posed with RPC going from 0.94 to 0.96 and up." [2].
> > >
> > > CoprocessorProtocol is how we did dynamic endpoints before 0.96/trunk
> > where
> > > we are moving to protobuf'ing all rpc Interactions.  Dynamic endpoints
> > are
> > > now done using CoprocessorService where you define your endpoint as a
> > > protobuf Service [1].
> > >
> > > Cons:
> > > + Any current coprocessor dynamic endpoint will need to be refactored
> to
> > > run on 0.96
> > > + We will have to support two very different underpinnings for an
> exotic
> > > though critical feature (We'd have to do this if we wanted to deprecate
> > to
> > > purge in another release)
> > >
> > > Pros:
> > > + Purge a bunch of code.  Simplify RPC.  Save a bunch of effort making
> > sure
> > > both mechanisms work.  One, "cleaner" (though perhaps more verbose) way
> > of
> > > implementing dynamic endpoints.
> > >
> > > I'm in favor of purge without deprecation.  I've done a few
> convertions.
> >  I
> > > volunteer to help out anyone who needs to make the transition.
> > >
> > > St.Ack
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 1. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-6789
> > > 2. http://goo.gl/fSTLM
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> >
> >    - Andy
> >
> > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
> > (via Tom White)
> >
>

--
Best regards,

   - Andy

Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)