You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@accumulo.apache.org by Corey Nolet <cn...@texeltek.com> on 2013/04/04 03:43:24 UTC
Backport of MiniAccumuloCluster v1.5 to v1.4
The back porting of the proxy is pretty much complete. I have not submitted the patch yet because I am not able to run any automated integration tests without the mini Accumulo cluster. I've gotten pretty far with backporting the Mini Accumulo Cluster and it would be massively useful to have the it in v1.4 (if it works out well). Anyone against submitting a separate patch for this when it's complete?
Re: Backport of MiniAccumuloCluster v1.5 to v1.4
Posted by Corey Nolet <cn...@texeltek.com>.
I cancelled my patch for the Proxy back port until I got the integration tests up. I have tested most of the features through my Accumulo++ project and the unit tests all pass (the cool thing is, I was still using the client generated with thrift 0.9.1 against 1.4 generated with 0.6.1).
Anyways, I can re-submit the patch for now and continue to churn on the MiniAccumuloCluster back port if time is of the essence. Currently, I'm finishing up parsing the command line args in the Initialize class so that the instance, root user, and root password can be passed in programmatically. After that, I just need to clean it up a bit and I'll be done.
On Apr 3, 2013, at 9:47 PM, Josh Elser wrote:
> My only concern would be having to add something in 1.5 (read as: delay the 1.5.0 release) to support the backport. Otherwise, +1 from me.
>
> ps. awesome work so far :D
>
> On 04/03/2013 09:43 PM, Corey Nolet wrote:
>> The back porting of the proxy is pretty much complete. I have not submitted the patch yet because I am not able to run any automated integration tests without the mini Accumulo cluster. I've gotten pretty far with backporting the Mini Accumulo Cluster and it would be massively useful to have the it in v1.4 (if it works out well). Anyone against submitting a separate patch for this when it's complete?
>
Re: Backport of MiniAccumuloCluster v1.5 to v1.4
Posted by Josh Elser <jo...@gmail.com>.
My only concern would be having to add something in 1.5 (read as: delay
the 1.5.0 release) to support the backport. Otherwise, +1 from me.
ps. awesome work so far :D
On 04/03/2013 09:43 PM, Corey Nolet wrote:
> The back porting of the proxy is pretty much complete. I have not submitted the patch yet because I am not able to run any automated integration tests without the mini Accumulo cluster. I've gotten pretty far with backporting the Mini Accumulo Cluster and it would be massively useful to have the it in v1.4 (if it works out well). Anyone against submitting a separate patch for this when it's complete?
Re: Backport of MiniAccumuloCluster v1.5 to v1.4
Posted by Keith Turner <ke...@deenlo.com>.
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 9:43 PM, Corey Nolet <cn...@texeltek.com> wrote:
> The back porting of the proxy is pretty much complete. I have not submitted the patch yet because I am not able to run any automated integration tests without the mini Accumulo cluster. I've gotten pretty far with backporting the Mini Accumulo Cluster and it would be massively useful to have the it in v1.4 (if it works out well). Anyone against submitting a separate patch for this when it's complete?
Are you aware of instamo in github? Thats where MiniAccumuloCluster
started and that works with 1.4.X.
Usually I would be opposed to adding new APIs to a bug fix release.
I think its confusing to be able to write accumulo code that works
against 1.4.4 and not 1.4.3. Eventually Alice will have to take code
written by Bob and run it on multiple clusters with different versions
of 1.4. When things break for Alice breaks because Bob used new APIs
that exist only in 1.4.4 who will get the blame, Bob or us? I do
understand the appeal as these features are extremely useful.
Personally I also like the Idea of helping Bob. Also these new
features build on Accumulo and do not modify the core code, so should
not destabilize 1.4. I am not opposed to this, but I did want to
state my reservations. Ultimately, as Josh said we just need to get
1.5.0 out the door.
As a practical matter, the since tags in 1.5 would need to change.
Currently MiniAccumuloCluster javadoc says since 1.5.0. I suppose it
would need to say since 1.4.4. If we release 1.5.0 before 1.4.4,
which seems likely, it would seem slightly odd for the 1.5.0 to code
to say since 1.4.4 which does not yet exists.
Re: Backport of MiniAccumuloCluster v1.5 to v1.4
Posted by Keith Turner <ke...@deenlo.com>.
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Corey Nolet <cn...@texeltek.com> wrote:
> Keith,
>
> I've been a huge fan of Instamo. I think it's genius! I don't want to complicate things by back porting the MiniAccumuloCluster and I'm mostly enjoying the deep dive into the codebase. Having the proxy supported in 1.4.* is a huge win and the integration tests would help, but if you guys are comfortable with using Mocks, I can still support bugs as they pop up.
I think users would really like the new feature, I am just worried
about the potential for confusion. I the more organized we are now
about what goes in 1.4.X releases, the more it will help us a year
from now when we are still supporting 1.4.X on production systems.
>
>
> On Apr 4, 2013, at 3:26 PM, Keith Turner wrote:
>
>> Thinking about the since tags a bit more, maybe the since tags should
>> just contain the version that we released first? That would imply
>> that maybe the since tags in 1.4.4 would say since 1.5.0?
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 9:43 PM, Corey Nolet <cn...@texeltek.com> wrote:
>>> The back porting of the proxy is pretty much complete. I have not submitted the patch yet because I am not able to run any automated integration tests without the mini Accumulo cluster. I've gotten pretty far with backporting the Mini Accumulo Cluster and it would be massively useful to have the it in v1.4 (if it works out well). Anyone against submitting a separate patch for this when it's complete?
>
Re: Backport of MiniAccumuloCluster v1.5 to v1.4
Posted by Corey Nolet <cn...@texeltek.com>.
Keith,
I've been a huge fan of Instamo. I think it's genius! I don't want to complicate things by back porting the MiniAccumuloCluster and I'm mostly enjoying the deep dive into the codebase. Having the proxy supported in 1.4.* is a huge win and the integration tests would help, but if you guys are comfortable with using Mocks, I can still support bugs as they pop up.
On Apr 4, 2013, at 3:26 PM, Keith Turner wrote:
> Thinking about the since tags a bit more, maybe the since tags should
> just contain the version that we released first? That would imply
> that maybe the since tags in 1.4.4 would say since 1.5.0?
>
> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 9:43 PM, Corey Nolet <cn...@texeltek.com> wrote:
>> The back porting of the proxy is pretty much complete. I have not submitted the patch yet because I am not able to run any automated integration tests without the mini Accumulo cluster. I've gotten pretty far with backporting the Mini Accumulo Cluster and it would be massively useful to have the it in v1.4 (if it works out well). Anyone against submitting a separate patch for this when it's complete?
Re: Backport of MiniAccumuloCluster v1.5 to v1.4
Posted by Keith Turner <ke...@deenlo.com>.
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 7:22 PM, Christopher <ct...@apache.org> wrote:
> I think if something does get backported, the @since tags should say
> the version it was first released, followed by a note saying that it
> was backported to the next release of the current series.
>
> Example:
> /**
> * @since 1.5.0, backported to 1.4.4
> */
>
> A more succinct syntax might be:
> /**
> * @since 1.5.0,1.4.4
> */
ah, thats perfect
>
>
> --
> Christopher L Tubbs II
> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Keith Turner <ke...@deenlo.com> wrote:
>> Thinking about the since tags a bit more, maybe the since tags should
>> just contain the version that we released first? That would imply
>> that maybe the since tags in 1.4.4 would say since 1.5.0?
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 9:43 PM, Corey Nolet <cn...@texeltek.com> wrote:
>>> The back porting of the proxy is pretty much complete. I have not submitted the patch yet because I am not able to run any automated integration tests without the mini Accumulo cluster. I've gotten pretty far with backporting the Mini Accumulo Cluster and it would be massively useful to have the it in v1.4 (if it works out well). Anyone against submitting a separate patch for this when it's complete?
Re: Backport of MiniAccumuloCluster v1.5 to v1.4
Posted by Corey Nolet <cn...@texeltek.com>.
@since tag added to back ported proxy
On Apr 4, 2013, at 7:22 PM, Christopher wrote:
> I think if something does get backported, the @since tags should say
> the version it was first released, followed by a note saying that it
> was backported to the next release of the current series.
>
> Example:
> /**
> * @since 1.5.0, backported to 1.4.4
> */
>
> A more succinct syntax might be:
> /**
> * @since 1.5.0,1.4.4
> */
>
>
> --
> Christopher L Tubbs II
> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Keith Turner <ke...@deenlo.com> wrote:
>> Thinking about the since tags a bit more, maybe the since tags should
>> just contain the version that we released first? That would imply
>> that maybe the since tags in 1.4.4 would say since 1.5.0?
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 9:43 PM, Corey Nolet <cn...@texeltek.com> wrote:
>>> The back porting of the proxy is pretty much complete. I have not submitted the patch yet because I am not able to run any automated integration tests without the mini Accumulo cluster. I've gotten pretty far with backporting the Mini Accumulo Cluster and it would be massively useful to have the it in v1.4 (if it works out well). Anyone against submitting a separate patch for this when it's complete?
Re: Backport of MiniAccumuloCluster v1.5 to v1.4
Posted by Christopher <ct...@apache.org>.
I think if something does get backported, the @since tags should say
the version it was first released, followed by a note saying that it
was backported to the next release of the current series.
Example:
/**
* @since 1.5.0, backported to 1.4.4
*/
A more succinct syntax might be:
/**
* @since 1.5.0,1.4.4
*/
--
Christopher L Tubbs II
http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Keith Turner <ke...@deenlo.com> wrote:
> Thinking about the since tags a bit more, maybe the since tags should
> just contain the version that we released first? That would imply
> that maybe the since tags in 1.4.4 would say since 1.5.0?
>
> On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 9:43 PM, Corey Nolet <cn...@texeltek.com> wrote:
>> The back porting of the proxy is pretty much complete. I have not submitted the patch yet because I am not able to run any automated integration tests without the mini Accumulo cluster. I've gotten pretty far with backporting the Mini Accumulo Cluster and it would be massively useful to have the it in v1.4 (if it works out well). Anyone against submitting a separate patch for this when it's complete?
Re: Backport of MiniAccumuloCluster v1.5 to v1.4
Posted by Keith Turner <ke...@deenlo.com>.
Thinking about the since tags a bit more, maybe the since tags should
just contain the version that we released first? That would imply
that maybe the since tags in 1.4.4 would say since 1.5.0?
On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 9:43 PM, Corey Nolet <cn...@texeltek.com> wrote:
> The back porting of the proxy is pretty much complete. I have not submitted the patch yet because I am not able to run any automated integration tests without the mini Accumulo cluster. I've gotten pretty far with backporting the Mini Accumulo Cluster and it would be massively useful to have the it in v1.4 (if it works out well). Anyone against submitting a separate patch for this when it's complete?