You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@hbase.apache.org by Stack <st...@duboce.net> on 2013/04/24 21:53:56 UTC
All ok w/ thrift2 going away in trunk/0.95?
Thrift2 was supposed to be the future -- an API like the native java API --
but it never got the support needed to make it a superset of thrift1.
Meantime folks are running thrift1 in production and patching it as they
need extra calls and fixes.
While we have two thrifts, thrift1 and thrift2, the latter of which we are
afraid to recommend because we do not know of any prod install, we sew
confusion ("Which should I use?", "Doc only talks about 'thrift'?").
HBASE-8184 is a patch to remove thrift2 until it gets a sponsor who can
move it beyond thrift1 . I already have a +1 to remove. Will let the
issue stew a day or two in case objection to thrift2 going away.
St.Ack
Re: All ok w/ thrift2 going away in trunk/0.95?
Posted by Lars George <la...@gmail.com>.
Do we have a list of current shortcomings with it? I would assume there are open JIRAs I could tackle?
Lars
On Apr 25, 2013, at 7:55, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Lars George <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I am -1 to remove, took a long time to get it in there and should
>> deprecate Thrift v1 - or else we are in the same mess as mapred and
>> mapreduce is. We once replaced the entire client API and now we can't do
>> this for Thrift?
>>
>> I am happy to work on v2 and fix or maintain it. It should be the way
>> forward methinks.
>
> I can leave it there and make the call later before we cut a 0.96. If
> thrift2 comes back to life in the meantime, well and good.
> Thanks Lars,
> St.Ack
Re: All ok w/ thrift2 going away in trunk/0.95?
Posted by Stack <st...@duboce.net>.
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Lars George <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am -1 to remove, took a long time to get it in there and should
> deprecate Thrift v1 - or else we are in the same mess as mapred and
> mapreduce is. We once replaced the entire client API and now we can't do
> this for Thrift?
>
> I am happy to work on v2 and fix or maintain it. It should be the way
> forward methinks.
>
I can leave it there and make the call later before we cut a 0.96. If
thrift2 comes back to life in the meantime, well and good.
Thanks Lars,
St.Ack
Re: All ok w/ thrift2 going away in trunk/0.95?
Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.
> everything's protobuf except for a few fixed bit width length
No. Consider KeyValue. A gateway could be a useful laboratory for
experimenting with approaches like
http://kentonv.github.io/capnproto/encoding.html .
The difference is a gateway can offer a simpler API, or experiment in new
directions, while RPC must conform to expected interfaces (if we want it to
be useful with the current client).
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org> wrote:
> I'm -0 on a protobuf gateway. We already have a protobuf rpc
> (everything's protobuf except for a few fixed bit width length).
>
> While we could create a gateway that simplifies the client api, I
> don't think that gains us enough to warrant more gateways. We already
> know that gateways are prone to getting overloaded, hard to keep in
> sync, and are large performance losses. I think we should keep the
> minimum number of gateways so that users starting out can get started
> early. But they already have that with thrift or rest.
>
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Enis Söztutar <en...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > PB gateway is an interesting proposal. I always thought of just making
> our
> > PB RPC an api, but we are not there yet. If this will help us getting
> > close, I will be a big +1.
> >
> > Enis
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org
> >wrote:
> >
> >> That's an interesting idea, although maybe not what you meant: If we
> had a
> >> PB only API gateway (e.g. no "PBUF" markers, no Writables anywhere,
> etc.)
> >> then this might be a way to evolve RPC to that state informed by
> experience
> >> with said gateway.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Jimmy Xiang <jx...@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > At first, I am +1 for removing it. We had a similar discussion
> before,
> >> and
> >> > didn't pull the plug because of Tim's comment:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hbase-dev/201212.mbox/%3CCAE9meBbH7V1PhSbeGtEpbXg1h5drbS+YdVyO0aKDR1d4JCE65Q@mail.gmail.com%3E
> >> >
> >> > To me, instead of complete and maintain Thrift2, it will be much
> better
> >> to
> >> > come up a new one since we are on PB now.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > Jimmy
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org
> >> > >wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > I'm glad someone has stepped forward to be an active responsive
> >> > maintainer
> >> > > of this piece of code. Maintenance is one issue, actual usage is
> >> another.
> >> > > Does anyone actually use this? What is the plan for Thrift? Do we
> >> > continue
> >> > > with both interfaces through one or more subsequent versions?
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Lars George <
> lars.george@gmail.com>
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > I am -1 to remove, took a long time to get it in there and should
> >> > > > deprecate Thrift v1 - or else we are in the same mess as mapred
> and
> >> > > > mapreduce is. We once replaced the entire client API and now we
> can't
> >> > do
> >> > > > this for Thrift?
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I am happy to work on v2 and fix or maintain it. It should be the
> way
> >> > > > forward methinks.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Lars
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Apr 24, 2013, at 21:53, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > Thrift2 was supposed to be the future -- an API like the native
> >> java
> >> > > API
> >> > > > --
> >> > > > > but it never got the support needed to make it a superset of
> >> thrift1.
> >> > > > > Meantime folks are running thrift1 in production and patching
> it as
> >> > > they
> >> > > > > need extra calls and fixes.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > While we have two thrifts, thrift1 and thrift2, the latter of
> which
> >> > we
> >> > > > are
> >> > > > > afraid to recommend because we do not know of any prod install,
> we
> >> > sew
> >> > > > > confusion ("Which should I use?", "Doc only talks about
> >> 'thrift'?").
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > HBASE-8184 is a patch to remove thrift2 until it gets a sponsor
> who
> >> > can
> >> > > > > move it beyond thrift1 . I already have a +1 to remove. Will
> let
> >> > the
> >> > > > > issue stew a day or two in case objection to thrift2 going away.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > St.Ack
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > --
> >> > > 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)
> >>
>
--
Best regards,
- Andy
Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)
Re: All ok w/ thrift2 going away in trunk/0.95?
Posted by Elliott Clark <ec...@apache.org>.
I'm -0 on a protobuf gateway. We already have a protobuf rpc
(everything's protobuf except for a few fixed bit width length).
While we could create a gateway that simplifies the client api, I
don't think that gains us enough to warrant more gateways. We already
know that gateways are prone to getting overloaded, hard to keep in
sync, and are large performance losses. I think we should keep the
minimum number of gateways so that users starting out can get started
early. But they already have that with thrift or rest.
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Enis Söztutar <en...@gmail.com> wrote:
> PB gateway is an interesting proposal. I always thought of just making our
> PB RPC an api, but we are not there yet. If this will help us getting
> close, I will be a big +1.
>
> Enis
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>wrote:
>
>> That's an interesting idea, although maybe not what you meant: If we had a
>> PB only API gateway (e.g. no "PBUF" markers, no Writables anywhere, etc.)
>> then this might be a way to evolve RPC to that state informed by experience
>> with said gateway.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Jimmy Xiang <jx...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>>
>> > At first, I am +1 for removing it. We had a similar discussion before,
>> and
>> > didn't pull the plug because of Tim's comment:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hbase-dev/201212.mbox/%3CCAE9meBbH7V1PhSbeGtEpbXg1h5drbS+YdVyO0aKDR1d4JCE65Q@mail.gmail.com%3E
>> >
>> > To me, instead of complete and maintain Thrift2, it will be much better
>> to
>> > come up a new one since we are on PB now.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Jimmy
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org
>> > >wrote:
>> >
>> > > I'm glad someone has stepped forward to be an active responsive
>> > maintainer
>> > > of this piece of code. Maintenance is one issue, actual usage is
>> another.
>> > > Does anyone actually use this? What is the plan for Thrift? Do we
>> > continue
>> > > with both interfaces through one or more subsequent versions?
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Lars George <la...@gmail.com>
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > I am -1 to remove, took a long time to get it in there and should
>> > > > deprecate Thrift v1 - or else we are in the same mess as mapred and
>> > > > mapreduce is. We once replaced the entire client API and now we can't
>> > do
>> > > > this for Thrift?
>> > > >
>> > > > I am happy to work on v2 and fix or maintain it. It should be the way
>> > > > forward methinks.
>> > > >
>> > > > Lars
>> > > >
>> > > > On Apr 24, 2013, at 21:53, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > > Thrift2 was supposed to be the future -- an API like the native
>> java
>> > > API
>> > > > --
>> > > > > but it never got the support needed to make it a superset of
>> thrift1.
>> > > > > Meantime folks are running thrift1 in production and patching it as
>> > > they
>> > > > > need extra calls and fixes.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > While we have two thrifts, thrift1 and thrift2, the latter of which
>> > we
>> > > > are
>> > > > > afraid to recommend because we do not know of any prod install, we
>> > sew
>> > > > > confusion ("Which should I use?", "Doc only talks about
>> 'thrift'?").
>> > > > >
>> > > > > HBASE-8184 is a patch to remove thrift2 until it gets a sponsor who
>> > can
>> > > > > move it beyond thrift1 . I already have a +1 to remove. Will let
>> > the
>> > > > > issue stew a day or two in case objection to thrift2 going away.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > St.Ack
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > 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)
>>
Re: All ok w/ thrift2 going away in trunk/0.95?
Posted by Enis Söztutar <en...@gmail.com>.
PB gateway is an interesting proposal. I always thought of just making our
PB RPC an api, but we are not there yet. If this will help us getting
close, I will be a big +1.
Enis
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>wrote:
> That's an interesting idea, although maybe not what you meant: If we had a
> PB only API gateway (e.g. no "PBUF" markers, no Writables anywhere, etc.)
> then this might be a way to evolve RPC to that state informed by experience
> with said gateway.
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Jimmy Xiang <jx...@cloudera.com> wrote:
>
> > At first, I am +1 for removing it. We had a similar discussion before,
> and
> > didn't pull the plug because of Tim's comment:
> >
> >
> >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hbase-dev/201212.mbox/%3CCAE9meBbH7V1PhSbeGtEpbXg1h5drbS+YdVyO0aKDR1d4JCE65Q@mail.gmail.com%3E
> >
> > To me, instead of complete and maintain Thrift2, it will be much better
> to
> > come up a new one since we are on PB now.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jimmy
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org
> > >wrote:
> >
> > > I'm glad someone has stepped forward to be an active responsive
> > maintainer
> > > of this piece of code. Maintenance is one issue, actual usage is
> another.
> > > Does anyone actually use this? What is the plan for Thrift? Do we
> > continue
> > > with both interfaces through one or more subsequent versions?
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Lars George <la...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I am -1 to remove, took a long time to get it in there and should
> > > > deprecate Thrift v1 - or else we are in the same mess as mapred and
> > > > mapreduce is. We once replaced the entire client API and now we can't
> > do
> > > > this for Thrift?
> > > >
> > > > I am happy to work on v2 and fix or maintain it. It should be the way
> > > > forward methinks.
> > > >
> > > > Lars
> > > >
> > > > On Apr 24, 2013, at 21:53, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Thrift2 was supposed to be the future -- an API like the native
> java
> > > API
> > > > --
> > > > > but it never got the support needed to make it a superset of
> thrift1.
> > > > > Meantime folks are running thrift1 in production and patching it as
> > > they
> > > > > need extra calls and fixes.
> > > > >
> > > > > While we have two thrifts, thrift1 and thrift2, the latter of which
> > we
> > > > are
> > > > > afraid to recommend because we do not know of any prod install, we
> > sew
> > > > > confusion ("Which should I use?", "Doc only talks about
> 'thrift'?").
> > > > >
> > > > > HBASE-8184 is a patch to remove thrift2 until it gets a sponsor who
> > can
> > > > > move it beyond thrift1 . I already have a +1 to remove. Will let
> > the
> > > > > issue stew a day or two in case objection to thrift2 going away.
> > > > >
> > > > > St.Ack
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > 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)
>
Re: All ok w/ thrift2 going away in trunk/0.95?
Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.
That's an interesting idea, although maybe not what you meant: If we had a
PB only API gateway (e.g. no "PBUF" markers, no Writables anywhere, etc.)
then this might be a way to evolve RPC to that state informed by experience
with said gateway.
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Jimmy Xiang <jx...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> At first, I am +1 for removing it. We had a similar discussion before, and
> didn't pull the plug because of Tim's comment:
>
>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hbase-dev/201212.mbox/%3CCAE9meBbH7V1PhSbeGtEpbXg1h5drbS+YdVyO0aKDR1d4JCE65Q@mail.gmail.com%3E
>
> To me, instead of complete and maintain Thrift2, it will be much better to
> come up a new one since we are on PB now.
>
> Thanks,
> Jimmy
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org
> >wrote:
>
> > I'm glad someone has stepped forward to be an active responsive
> maintainer
> > of this piece of code. Maintenance is one issue, actual usage is another.
> > Does anyone actually use this? What is the plan for Thrift? Do we
> continue
> > with both interfaces through one or more subsequent versions?
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Lars George <la...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I am -1 to remove, took a long time to get it in there and should
> > > deprecate Thrift v1 - or else we are in the same mess as mapred and
> > > mapreduce is. We once replaced the entire client API and now we can't
> do
> > > this for Thrift?
> > >
> > > I am happy to work on v2 and fix or maintain it. It should be the way
> > > forward methinks.
> > >
> > > Lars
> > >
> > > On Apr 24, 2013, at 21:53, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thrift2 was supposed to be the future -- an API like the native java
> > API
> > > --
> > > > but it never got the support needed to make it a superset of thrift1.
> > > > Meantime folks are running thrift1 in production and patching it as
> > they
> > > > need extra calls and fixes.
> > > >
> > > > While we have two thrifts, thrift1 and thrift2, the latter of which
> we
> > > are
> > > > afraid to recommend because we do not know of any prod install, we
> sew
> > > > confusion ("Which should I use?", "Doc only talks about 'thrift'?").
> > > >
> > > > HBASE-8184 is a patch to remove thrift2 until it gets a sponsor who
> can
> > > > move it beyond thrift1 . I already have a +1 to remove. Will let
> the
> > > > issue stew a day or two in case objection to thrift2 going away.
> > > >
> > > > St.Ack
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > 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)
Re: All ok w/ thrift2 going away in trunk/0.95?
Posted by Lars George <la...@gmail.com>.
Makes sense Stack, I will get started on this and report here as well as on JIRA. Let's clean this thing up and get used.
On May 5, 2013, at 2:15, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 12:41 AM, Lars George <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Ted,
>>
>> I have found that too by just searching all components for "thrift". Is
>> that all though? I mean, why are we actually wanting to drop thrift2?
>
> See head of this thread for why to drop it.
>
> Would suggest a comprehensive review of thrift1/thrift2 to see where there
> are holes (review of JIRA will not tell you this; my guess is folks tried
> thrift2, found issues, then list told them use thrift1... if issues in
> thrift1, they might file issues). For issues found, file issues to fill
> the gaps so it is obvious this is getting some attention. If none, say so.
> Would suggest a bit of testing too so you could confidently state "thrift2
> is as comprehensive as thrift1" and can be depended upon, etc.
>
> St.Ack
Re: All ok w/ thrift2 going away in trunk/0.95?
Posted by Stack <st...@duboce.net>.
On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 12:41 AM, Lars George <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Ted,
>
> I have found that too by just searching all components for "thrift". Is
> that all though? I mean, why are we actually wanting to drop thrift2?
>
See head of this thread for why to drop it.
Would suggest a comprehensive review of thrift1/thrift2 to see where there
are holes (review of JIRA will not tell you this; my guess is folks tried
thrift2, found issues, then list told them use thrift1... if issues in
thrift1, they might file issues). For issues found, file issues to fill
the gaps so it is obvious this is getting some attention. If none, say so.
Would suggest a bit of testing too so you could confidently state "thrift2
is as comprehensive as thrift1" and can be depended upon, etc.
St.Ack
Re: All ok w/ thrift2 going away in trunk/0.95?
Posted by Lars George <la...@gmail.com>.
Hi Ted,
I have found that too by just searching all components for "thrift". Is that all though? I mean, why are we actually wanting to drop thrift2?
Lars
On May 3, 2013, at 23:55, Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Expanding the search criteria in the link below, I found the following
> (with a patch):
>
> HBASE-6073 Add support for scan filters in Thrift2
>
> Cheers
>
> On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 2:21 PM, Lars George <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Understood, but I hope my clarification helped to rectify that. I was not
>> in any way claiming REST is not current, but merely was commenting on the
>> fact that the thread had drifted off into a general PB or not discussion. I
>> still believe Thrift2 is the way to go forward and will work on it. I have
>> started looking at the JIRAs, but they are not very conclusive:
>>
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=-4&jql=project%20%3D%20HBASE%20AND%20component%20%3D%20Thrift%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened)%20ORDER%20BY%20createdDate%20DESC
>>
>> I was wondering if someone knows what the known issues are. But I can work
>> through that list and check the Thrift2 API against the client API to see
>> what is amiss.
>>
>> Lars
>>
>> On May 3, 2013, at 11:14 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I didn't take offence, but it's a false equivalency.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Lars George <la...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> No Andy, I was just saying, if we remove Thrift2 for a PB backed
>> gateway,
>>>> then we could as well remove them all. REST was just an example. No
>> offence
>>>> meant.
>>>>
>>>> Lars
>>>>
>>>> On May 3, 2013, at 6:04 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> We don't have a proper REST API? Please provide more detail on what you
>>>>> think is lacking. The status of Thrift2 and REST are the same? The REST
>>>> API
>>>>> is not actively maintained?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Friday, May 3, 2013, Lars George wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Jimmy,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Inline...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Apr 25, 2013, at 8:18 PM, Jimmy Xiang <jxiang@cloudera.com
>>>> <javascript:;>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> At first, I am +1 for removing it. We had a similar discussion
>> before,
>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> didn't pull the plug because of Tim's comment:
>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hbase-dev/201212.mbox/%3CCAE9meBbH7V1PhSbeGtEpbXg1h5drbS+YdVyO0aKDR1d4JCE65Q@mail.gmail.com%3E
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am with Tim here (it was me that pushed Tim to complete this work in
>>>> the
>>>>>> first place).
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To me, instead of complete and maintain Thrift2, it will be much
>> better
>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> come up a new one since we are on PB now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is independent if you ask me. We should have a proper Thrift one,
>>>>>> same with REST. Or do you want to toss out REST as well since we now
>>>> have
>>>>>> PB RPCs?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am willing to work and maintain Thrift2, I said that before. This
>>>> thread
>>>>>> though got derailed in general wishful thinking, so could we please
>>>> maybe
>>>>>> vote if we want Thrift and more especially Thrift2. Because we either
>>>> throw
>>>>>> out Thrift in total for PB or maintain it for the time being.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Lars
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Jimmy
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Andrew Purtell <
>> apurtell@apache.org
>>>> <javascript:;>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm glad someone has stepped forward to be an active responsive
>>>>>> maintainer
>>>>>>>> of this piece of code. Maintenance is one issue, actual usage is
>>>>>> another.
>>>>>>>> Does anyone actually use this? What is the plan for Thrift? Do we
>>>>>> continue
>>>>>>>> with both interfaces through one or more subsequent versions?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Lars George <
>> lars.george@gmail.com
>>>> <javascript:;>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I am -1 to remove, took a long time to get it in there and should
>>>>>>>>> deprecate Thrift v1 - or else we are in the same mess as mapred and
>>>>>>>>> mapreduce is. We once replaced the entire client API and now we
>> can't
>>>>>> do
>>>>>>>>> this for Thrift?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I am happy to work on v2 and fix or maintain it. It should be the
>> way
>>>>>>>>> forward methinks.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Lars
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Apr 24, 2013, at 21:53, Stack <stack@duboce.net <javascript:;>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thrift2 was supposed to be the future -- an API like the native
>> java
>>>>>>>> API
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> but it never got the support needed to make it a superset of
>>>> thrift1.
>>>>>>>>>> Meantime folks are running thrift1 in production and patching it
>> as
>>>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>>>> need extra calls and fixes.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> While we have two thrifts, thrift1 and thrift2, the latter of
>> which
>>>> we
>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>>> afraid to recommend because we do not know of any prod install, we
>>>> sew
>>>>>>>>>> confusion ("Which should I use?", "Doc only talks about
>>>> 'thrift'?").
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> HBASE-8184 is a patch to remove thrift2 until it gets a sponsor
>> who
>>>>>> can
>>>>>>>>>> move it beyond thrift1 . I already have a +1 to remove. Will let
>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> issue stew a day or two in case objection to thrift2 going away.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> St.Ack
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> 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)
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> - Andy
>>>
>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
>>> (via Tom White)
>>
>>
Re: All ok w/ thrift2 going away in trunk/0.95?
Posted by Ted Yu <yu...@gmail.com>.
Expanding the search criteria in the link below, I found the following
(with a patch):
HBASE-6073 Add support for scan filters in Thrift2
Cheers
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 2:21 PM, Lars George <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Understood, but I hope my clarification helped to rectify that. I was not
> in any way claiming REST is not current, but merely was commenting on the
> fact that the thread had drifted off into a general PB or not discussion. I
> still believe Thrift2 is the way to go forward and will work on it. I have
> started looking at the JIRAs, but they are not very conclusive:
>
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=-4&jql=project%20%3D%20HBASE%20AND%20component%20%3D%20Thrift%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened)%20ORDER%20BY%20createdDate%20DESC
>
> I was wondering if someone knows what the known issues are. But I can work
> through that list and check the Thrift2 API against the client API to see
> what is amiss.
>
> Lars
>
> On May 3, 2013, at 11:14 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > I didn't take offence, but it's a false equivalency.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Lars George <la...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> No Andy, I was just saying, if we remove Thrift2 for a PB backed
> gateway,
> >> then we could as well remove them all. REST was just an example. No
> offence
> >> meant.
> >>
> >> Lars
> >>
> >> On May 3, 2013, at 6:04 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> We don't have a proper REST API? Please provide more detail on what you
> >>> think is lacking. The status of Thrift2 and REST are the same? The REST
> >> API
> >>> is not actively maintained?
> >>>
> >>> On Friday, May 3, 2013, Lars George wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi Jimmy,
> >>>>
> >>>> Inline...
> >>>>
> >>>> On Apr 25, 2013, at 8:18 PM, Jimmy Xiang <jxiang@cloudera.com
> >> <javascript:;>>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> At first, I am +1 for removing it. We had a similar discussion
> before,
> >>>> and
> >>>>> didn't pull the plug because of Tim's comment:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hbase-dev/201212.mbox/%3CCAE9meBbH7V1PhSbeGtEpbXg1h5drbS+YdVyO0aKDR1d4JCE65Q@mail.gmail.com%3E
> >>>>
> >>>> I am with Tim here (it was me that pushed Tim to complete this work in
> >> the
> >>>> first place).
> >>>>
> >>>>> To me, instead of complete and maintain Thrift2, it will be much
> better
> >>>> to
> >>>>> come up a new one since we are on PB now.
> >>>>
> >>>> That is independent if you ask me. We should have a proper Thrift one,
> >>>> same with REST. Or do you want to toss out REST as well since we now
> >> have
> >>>> PB RPCs?
> >>>>
> >>>> I am willing to work and maintain Thrift2, I said that before. This
> >> thread
> >>>> though got derailed in general wishful thinking, so could we please
> >> maybe
> >>>> vote if we want Thrift and more especially Thrift2. Because we either
> >> throw
> >>>> out Thrift in total for PB or maintain it for the time being.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thoughts?
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers,
> >>>> Lars
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>> Jimmy
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Andrew Purtell <
> apurtell@apache.org
> >> <javascript:;>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> I'm glad someone has stepped forward to be an active responsive
> >>>> maintainer
> >>>>>> of this piece of code. Maintenance is one issue, actual usage is
> >>>> another.
> >>>>>> Does anyone actually use this? What is the plan for Thrift? Do we
> >>>> continue
> >>>>>> with both interfaces through one or more subsequent versions?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Lars George <
> lars.george@gmail.com
> >> <javascript:;>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I am -1 to remove, took a long time to get it in there and should
> >>>>>>> deprecate Thrift v1 - or else we are in the same mess as mapred and
> >>>>>>> mapreduce is. We once replaced the entire client API and now we
> can't
> >>>> do
> >>>>>>> this for Thrift?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I am happy to work on v2 and fix or maintain it. It should be the
> way
> >>>>>>> forward methinks.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Lars
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Apr 24, 2013, at 21:53, Stack <stack@duboce.net <javascript:;>>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Thrift2 was supposed to be the future -- an API like the native
> java
> >>>>>> API
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>> but it never got the support needed to make it a superset of
> >> thrift1.
> >>>>>>>> Meantime folks are running thrift1 in production and patching it
> as
> >>>>>> they
> >>>>>>>> need extra calls and fixes.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> While we have two thrifts, thrift1 and thrift2, the latter of
> which
> >> we
> >>>>>>> are
> >>>>>>>> afraid to recommend because we do not know of any prod install, we
> >> sew
> >>>>>>>> confusion ("Which should I use?", "Doc only talks about
> >> 'thrift'?").
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> HBASE-8184 is a patch to remove thrift2 until it gets a sponsor
> who
> >>>> can
> >>>>>>>> move it beyond thrift1 . I already have a +1 to remove. Will let
> >> the
> >>>>>>>> issue stew a day or two in case objection to thrift2 going away.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> St.Ack
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> 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)
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> >
> > - Andy
> >
> > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
> > (via Tom White)
>
>
Re: All ok w/ thrift2 going away in trunk/0.95?
Posted by Lars George <la...@gmail.com>.
Understood, but I hope my clarification helped to rectify that. I was not in any way claiming REST is not current, but merely was commenting on the fact that the thread had drifted off into a general PB or not discussion. I still believe Thrift2 is the way to go forward and will work on it. I have started looking at the JIRAs, but they are not very conclusive:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=-4&jql=project%20%3D%20HBASE%20AND%20component%20%3D%20Thrift%20AND%20status%20in%20(Open%2C%20%22In%20Progress%22%2C%20Reopened)%20ORDER%20BY%20createdDate%20DESC
I was wondering if someone knows what the known issues are. But I can work through that list and check the Thrift2 API against the client API to see what is amiss.
Lars
On May 3, 2013, at 11:14 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
> I didn't take offence, but it's a false equivalency.
>
>
> On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Lars George <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> No Andy, I was just saying, if we remove Thrift2 for a PB backed gateway,
>> then we could as well remove them all. REST was just an example. No offence
>> meant.
>>
>> Lars
>>
>> On May 3, 2013, at 6:04 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> We don't have a proper REST API? Please provide more detail on what you
>>> think is lacking. The status of Thrift2 and REST are the same? The REST
>> API
>>> is not actively maintained?
>>>
>>> On Friday, May 3, 2013, Lars George wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Jimmy,
>>>>
>>>> Inline...
>>>>
>>>> On Apr 25, 2013, at 8:18 PM, Jimmy Xiang <jxiang@cloudera.com
>> <javascript:;>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> At first, I am +1 for removing it. We had a similar discussion before,
>>>> and
>>>>> didn't pull the plug because of Tim's comment:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hbase-dev/201212.mbox/%3CCAE9meBbH7V1PhSbeGtEpbXg1h5drbS+YdVyO0aKDR1d4JCE65Q@mail.gmail.com%3E
>>>>
>>>> I am with Tim here (it was me that pushed Tim to complete this work in
>> the
>>>> first place).
>>>>
>>>>> To me, instead of complete and maintain Thrift2, it will be much better
>>>> to
>>>>> come up a new one since we are on PB now.
>>>>
>>>> That is independent if you ask me. We should have a proper Thrift one,
>>>> same with REST. Or do you want to toss out REST as well since we now
>> have
>>>> PB RPCs?
>>>>
>>>> I am willing to work and maintain Thrift2, I said that before. This
>> thread
>>>> though got derailed in general wishful thinking, so could we please
>> maybe
>>>> vote if we want Thrift and more especially Thrift2. Because we either
>> throw
>>>> out Thrift in total for PB or maintain it for the time being.
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Lars
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Jimmy
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org
>> <javascript:;>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm glad someone has stepped forward to be an active responsive
>>>> maintainer
>>>>>> of this piece of code. Maintenance is one issue, actual usage is
>>>> another.
>>>>>> Does anyone actually use this? What is the plan for Thrift? Do we
>>>> continue
>>>>>> with both interfaces through one or more subsequent versions?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Lars George <lars.george@gmail.com
>> <javascript:;>
>>>>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am -1 to remove, took a long time to get it in there and should
>>>>>>> deprecate Thrift v1 - or else we are in the same mess as mapred and
>>>>>>> mapreduce is. We once replaced the entire client API and now we can't
>>>> do
>>>>>>> this for Thrift?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am happy to work on v2 and fix or maintain it. It should be the way
>>>>>>> forward methinks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Lars
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Apr 24, 2013, at 21:53, Stack <stack@duboce.net <javascript:;>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thrift2 was supposed to be the future -- an API like the native java
>>>>>> API
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> but it never got the support needed to make it a superset of
>> thrift1.
>>>>>>>> Meantime folks are running thrift1 in production and patching it as
>>>>>> they
>>>>>>>> need extra calls and fixes.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> While we have two thrifts, thrift1 and thrift2, the latter of which
>> we
>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>> afraid to recommend because we do not know of any prod install, we
>> sew
>>>>>>>> confusion ("Which should I use?", "Doc only talks about
>> 'thrift'?").
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> HBASE-8184 is a patch to remove thrift2 until it gets a sponsor who
>>>> can
>>>>>>>> move it beyond thrift1 . I already have a +1 to remove. Will let
>> the
>>>>>>>> issue stew a day or two in case objection to thrift2 going away.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> St.Ack
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> 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)
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
>
> - Andy
>
> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
> (via Tom White)
Re: All ok w/ thrift2 going away in trunk/0.95?
Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.
I didn't take offence, but it's a false equivalency.
On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 2:02 PM, Lars George <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No Andy, I was just saying, if we remove Thrift2 for a PB backed gateway,
> then we could as well remove them all. REST was just an example. No offence
> meant.
>
> Lars
>
> On May 3, 2013, at 6:04 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > We don't have a proper REST API? Please provide more detail on what you
> > think is lacking. The status of Thrift2 and REST are the same? The REST
> API
> > is not actively maintained?
> >
> > On Friday, May 3, 2013, Lars George wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Jimmy,
> >>
> >> Inline...
> >>
> >> On Apr 25, 2013, at 8:18 PM, Jimmy Xiang <jxiang@cloudera.com
> <javascript:;>>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> At first, I am +1 for removing it. We had a similar discussion before,
> >> and
> >>> didn't pull the plug because of Tim's comment:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hbase-dev/201212.mbox/%3CCAE9meBbH7V1PhSbeGtEpbXg1h5drbS+YdVyO0aKDR1d4JCE65Q@mail.gmail.com%3E
> >>
> >> I am with Tim here (it was me that pushed Tim to complete this work in
> the
> >> first place).
> >>
> >>> To me, instead of complete and maintain Thrift2, it will be much better
> >> to
> >>> come up a new one since we are on PB now.
> >>
> >> That is independent if you ask me. We should have a proper Thrift one,
> >> same with REST. Or do you want to toss out REST as well since we now
> have
> >> PB RPCs?
> >>
> >> I am willing to work and maintain Thrift2, I said that before. This
> thread
> >> though got derailed in general wishful thinking, so could we please
> maybe
> >> vote if we want Thrift and more especially Thrift2. Because we either
> throw
> >> out Thrift in total for PB or maintain it for the time being.
> >>
> >> Thoughts?
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Lars
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Jimmy
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org
> <javascript:;>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I'm glad someone has stepped forward to be an active responsive
> >> maintainer
> >>>> of this piece of code. Maintenance is one issue, actual usage is
> >> another.
> >>>> Does anyone actually use this? What is the plan for Thrift? Do we
> >> continue
> >>>> with both interfaces through one or more subsequent versions?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Lars George <lars.george@gmail.com
> <javascript:;>
> >>>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> I am -1 to remove, took a long time to get it in there and should
> >>>>> deprecate Thrift v1 - or else we are in the same mess as mapred and
> >>>>> mapreduce is. We once replaced the entire client API and now we can't
> >> do
> >>>>> this for Thrift?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I am happy to work on v2 and fix or maintain it. It should be the way
> >>>>> forward methinks.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Lars
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Apr 24, 2013, at 21:53, Stack <stack@duboce.net <javascript:;>>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Thrift2 was supposed to be the future -- an API like the native java
> >>>> API
> >>>>> --
> >>>>>> but it never got the support needed to make it a superset of
> thrift1.
> >>>>>> Meantime folks are running thrift1 in production and patching it as
> >>>> they
> >>>>>> need extra calls and fixes.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> While we have two thrifts, thrift1 and thrift2, the latter of which
> we
> >>>>> are
> >>>>>> afraid to recommend because we do not know of any prod install, we
> sew
> >>>>>> confusion ("Which should I use?", "Doc only talks about
> 'thrift'?").
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> HBASE-8184 is a patch to remove thrift2 until it gets a sponsor who
> >> can
> >>>>>> move it beyond thrift1 . I already have a +1 to remove. Will let
> the
> >>>>>> issue stew a day or two in case objection to thrift2 going away.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> St.Ack
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> 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)
>
>
--
Best regards,
- Andy
Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)
Re: All ok w/ thrift2 going away in trunk/0.95?
Posted by Lars George <la...@gmail.com>.
No Andy, I was just saying, if we remove Thrift2 for a PB backed gateway, then we could as well remove them all. REST was just an example. No offence meant.
Lars
On May 3, 2013, at 6:04 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
> We don't have a proper REST API? Please provide more detail on what you
> think is lacking. The status of Thrift2 and REST are the same? The REST API
> is not actively maintained?
>
> On Friday, May 3, 2013, Lars George wrote:
>
>> Hi Jimmy,
>>
>> Inline...
>>
>> On Apr 25, 2013, at 8:18 PM, Jimmy Xiang <jxiang@cloudera.com<javascript:;>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> At first, I am +1 for removing it. We had a similar discussion before,
>> and
>>> didn't pull the plug because of Tim's comment:
>>>
>>>
>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hbase-dev/201212.mbox/%3CCAE9meBbH7V1PhSbeGtEpbXg1h5drbS+YdVyO0aKDR1d4JCE65Q@mail.gmail.com%3E
>>
>> I am with Tim here (it was me that pushed Tim to complete this work in the
>> first place).
>>
>>> To me, instead of complete and maintain Thrift2, it will be much better
>> to
>>> come up a new one since we are on PB now.
>>
>> That is independent if you ask me. We should have a proper Thrift one,
>> same with REST. Or do you want to toss out REST as well since we now have
>> PB RPCs?
>>
>> I am willing to work and maintain Thrift2, I said that before. This thread
>> though got derailed in general wishful thinking, so could we please maybe
>> vote if we want Thrift and more especially Thrift2. Because we either throw
>> out Thrift in total for PB or maintain it for the time being.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Lars
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Jimmy
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org<javascript:;>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm glad someone has stepped forward to be an active responsive
>> maintainer
>>>> of this piece of code. Maintenance is one issue, actual usage is
>> another.
>>>> Does anyone actually use this? What is the plan for Thrift? Do we
>> continue
>>>> with both interfaces through one or more subsequent versions?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Lars George <lars.george@gmail.com<javascript:;>
>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I am -1 to remove, took a long time to get it in there and should
>>>>> deprecate Thrift v1 - or else we are in the same mess as mapred and
>>>>> mapreduce is. We once replaced the entire client API and now we can't
>> do
>>>>> this for Thrift?
>>>>>
>>>>> I am happy to work on v2 and fix or maintain it. It should be the way
>>>>> forward methinks.
>>>>>
>>>>> Lars
>>>>>
>>>>> On Apr 24, 2013, at 21:53, Stack <stack@duboce.net <javascript:;>>
>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Thrift2 was supposed to be the future -- an API like the native java
>>>> API
>>>>> --
>>>>>> but it never got the support needed to make it a superset of thrift1.
>>>>>> Meantime folks are running thrift1 in production and patching it as
>>>> they
>>>>>> need extra calls and fixes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> While we have two thrifts, thrift1 and thrift2, the latter of which we
>>>>> are
>>>>>> afraid to recommend because we do not know of any prod install, we sew
>>>>>> confusion ("Which should I use?", "Doc only talks about 'thrift'?").
>>>>>>
>>>>>> HBASE-8184 is a patch to remove thrift2 until it gets a sponsor who
>> can
>>>>>> move it beyond thrift1 . I already have a +1 to remove. Will let the
>>>>>> issue stew a day or two in case objection to thrift2 going away.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> St.Ack
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> 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)
Re: All ok w/ thrift2 going away in trunk/0.95?
Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.
We don't have a proper REST API? Please provide more detail on what you
think is lacking. The status of Thrift2 and REST are the same? The REST API
is not actively maintained?
On Friday, May 3, 2013, Lars George wrote:
> Hi Jimmy,
>
> Inline...
>
> On Apr 25, 2013, at 8:18 PM, Jimmy Xiang <jxiang@cloudera.com<javascript:;>>
> wrote:
>
> > At first, I am +1 for removing it. We had a similar discussion before,
> and
> > didn't pull the plug because of Tim's comment:
> >
> >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hbase-dev/201212.mbox/%3CCAE9meBbH7V1PhSbeGtEpbXg1h5drbS+YdVyO0aKDR1d4JCE65Q@mail.gmail.com%3E
>
> I am with Tim here (it was me that pushed Tim to complete this work in the
> first place).
>
> > To me, instead of complete and maintain Thrift2, it will be much better
> to
> > come up a new one since we are on PB now.
>
> That is independent if you ask me. We should have a proper Thrift one,
> same with REST. Or do you want to toss out REST as well since we now have
> PB RPCs?
>
> I am willing to work and maintain Thrift2, I said that before. This thread
> though got derailed in general wishful thinking, so could we please maybe
> vote if we want Thrift and more especially Thrift2. Because we either throw
> out Thrift in total for PB or maintain it for the time being.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Cheers,
> Lars
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jimmy
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org<javascript:;>
> >wrote:
> >
> >> I'm glad someone has stepped forward to be an active responsive
> maintainer
> >> of this piece of code. Maintenance is one issue, actual usage is
> another.
> >> Does anyone actually use this? What is the plan for Thrift? Do we
> continue
> >> with both interfaces through one or more subsequent versions?
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Lars George <lars.george@gmail.com<javascript:;>
> >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I am -1 to remove, took a long time to get it in there and should
> >>> deprecate Thrift v1 - or else we are in the same mess as mapred and
> >>> mapreduce is. We once replaced the entire client API and now we can't
> do
> >>> this for Thrift?
> >>>
> >>> I am happy to work on v2 and fix or maintain it. It should be the way
> >>> forward methinks.
> >>>
> >>> Lars
> >>>
> >>> On Apr 24, 2013, at 21:53, Stack <stack@duboce.net <javascript:;>>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Thrift2 was supposed to be the future -- an API like the native java
> >> API
> >>> --
> >>>> but it never got the support needed to make it a superset of thrift1.
> >>>> Meantime folks are running thrift1 in production and patching it as
> >> they
> >>>> need extra calls and fixes.
> >>>>
> >>>> While we have two thrifts, thrift1 and thrift2, the latter of which we
> >>> are
> >>>> afraid to recommend because we do not know of any prod install, we sew
> >>>> confusion ("Which should I use?", "Doc only talks about 'thrift'?").
> >>>>
> >>>> HBASE-8184 is a patch to remove thrift2 until it gets a sponsor who
> can
> >>>> move it beyond thrift1 . I already have a +1 to remove. Will let the
> >>>> issue stew a day or two in case objection to thrift2 going away.
> >>>>
> >>>> St.Ack
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> 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)
Re: All ok w/ thrift2 going away in trunk/0.95?
Posted by Lars George <la...@gmail.com>.
Ah, good point. We do have a Thrift2 implementation, and I offered to take care of it. I am just a bit unsure about where things are, do you know if all open issues are in JIRA? Or is there something else more fundamentally wrong with it?
Thanks,
Lars
On May 3, 2013, at 6:06 PM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org> wrote:
> Put up a patch for Thrift2 or this debate is academic.
>
> On Friday, May 3, 2013, Lars George wrote:
>
>> Hi Jimmy,
>>
>> Inline...
>>
>> On Apr 25, 2013, at 8:18 PM, Jimmy Xiang <jxiang@cloudera.com<javascript:;>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> At first, I am +1 for removing it. We had a similar discussion before,
>> and
>>> didn't pull the plug because of Tim's comment:
>>>
>>>
>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hbase-dev/201212.mbox/%3CCAE9meBbH7V1PhSbeGtEpbXg1h5drbS+YdVyO0aKDR1d4JCE65Q@mail.gmail.com%3E
>>
>> I am with Tim here (it was me that pushed Tim to complete this work in the
>> first place).
>>
>>> To me, instead of complete and maintain Thrift2, it will be much better
>> to
>>> come up a new one since we are on PB now.
>>
>> That is independent if you ask me. We should have a proper Thrift one,
>> same with REST. Or do you want to toss out REST as well since we now have
>> PB RPCs?
>>
>> I am willing to work and maintain Thrift2, I said that before. This thread
>> though got derailed in general wishful thinking, so could we please maybe
>> vote if we want Thrift and more especially Thrift2. Because we either throw
>> out Thrift in total for PB or maintain it for the time being.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Lars
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Jimmy
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org<javascript:;>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm glad someone has stepped forward to be an active responsive
>> maintainer
>>>> of this piece of code. Maintenance is one issue, actual usage is
>> another.
>>>> Does anyone actually use this? What is the plan for Thrift? Do we
>> continue
>>>> with both interfaces through one or more subsequent versions?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Lars George <lars.george@gmail.com<javascript:;>
>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I am -1 to remove, took a long time to get it in there and should
>>>>> deprecate Thrift v1 - or else we are in the same mess as mapred and
>>>>> mapreduce is. We once replaced the entire client API and now we can't
>> do
>>>>> this for Thrift?
>>>>>
>>>>> I am happy to work on v2 and fix or maintain it. It should be the way
>>>>> forward methinks.
>>>>>
>>>>> Lars
>>>>>
>>>>> On Apr 24, 2013, at 21:53, Stack <stack@duboce.net <javascript:;>>
>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Thrift2 was supposed to be the future -- an API like the native java
>>>> API
>>>>> --
>>>>>> but it never got the support needed to make it a superset of thrift1.
>>>>>> Meantime folks are running thrift1 in production and patching it as
>>>> they
>>>>>> need extra calls and fixes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> While we have two thrifts, thrift1 and thrift2, the latter of which we
>>>>> are
>>>>>> afraid to recommend because we do not know of any prod install, we sew
>>>>>> confusion ("Which should I use?", "Doc only talks about 'thrift'?").
>>>>>>
>>>>>> HBASE-8184 is a patch to remove thrift2 until it gets a sponsor who
>> can
>>>>>> move it beyond thrift1 . I already have a +1 to remove. Will let the
>>>>>> issue stew a day or two in case objection to thrift2 going away.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> St.Ack
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> 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)
Re: All ok w/ thrift2 going away in trunk/0.95?
Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.
Put up a patch for Thrift2 or this debate is academic.
On Friday, May 3, 2013, Lars George wrote:
> Hi Jimmy,
>
> Inline...
>
> On Apr 25, 2013, at 8:18 PM, Jimmy Xiang <jxiang@cloudera.com<javascript:;>>
> wrote:
>
> > At first, I am +1 for removing it. We had a similar discussion before,
> and
> > didn't pull the plug because of Tim's comment:
> >
> >
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hbase-dev/201212.mbox/%3CCAE9meBbH7V1PhSbeGtEpbXg1h5drbS+YdVyO0aKDR1d4JCE65Q@mail.gmail.com%3E
>
> I am with Tim here (it was me that pushed Tim to complete this work in the
> first place).
>
> > To me, instead of complete and maintain Thrift2, it will be much better
> to
> > come up a new one since we are on PB now.
>
> That is independent if you ask me. We should have a proper Thrift one,
> same with REST. Or do you want to toss out REST as well since we now have
> PB RPCs?
>
> I am willing to work and maintain Thrift2, I said that before. This thread
> though got derailed in general wishful thinking, so could we please maybe
> vote if we want Thrift and more especially Thrift2. Because we either throw
> out Thrift in total for PB or maintain it for the time being.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Cheers,
> Lars
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jimmy
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org<javascript:;>
> >wrote:
> >
> >> I'm glad someone has stepped forward to be an active responsive
> maintainer
> >> of this piece of code. Maintenance is one issue, actual usage is
> another.
> >> Does anyone actually use this? What is the plan for Thrift? Do we
> continue
> >> with both interfaces through one or more subsequent versions?
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Lars George <lars.george@gmail.com<javascript:;>
> >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I am -1 to remove, took a long time to get it in there and should
> >>> deprecate Thrift v1 - or else we are in the same mess as mapred and
> >>> mapreduce is. We once replaced the entire client API and now we can't
> do
> >>> this for Thrift?
> >>>
> >>> I am happy to work on v2 and fix or maintain it. It should be the way
> >>> forward methinks.
> >>>
> >>> Lars
> >>>
> >>> On Apr 24, 2013, at 21:53, Stack <stack@duboce.net <javascript:;>>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Thrift2 was supposed to be the future -- an API like the native java
> >> API
> >>> --
> >>>> but it never got the support needed to make it a superset of thrift1.
> >>>> Meantime folks are running thrift1 in production and patching it as
> >> they
> >>>> need extra calls and fixes.
> >>>>
> >>>> While we have two thrifts, thrift1 and thrift2, the latter of which we
> >>> are
> >>>> afraid to recommend because we do not know of any prod install, we sew
> >>>> confusion ("Which should I use?", "Doc only talks about 'thrift'?").
> >>>>
> >>>> HBASE-8184 is a patch to remove thrift2 until it gets a sponsor who
> can
> >>>> move it beyond thrift1 . I already have a +1 to remove. Will let the
> >>>> issue stew a day or two in case objection to thrift2 going away.
> >>>>
> >>>> St.Ack
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> 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)
Re: All ok w/ thrift2 going away in trunk/0.95?
Posted by Lars George <la...@gmail.com>.
Hi Jimmy,
Inline...
On Apr 25, 2013, at 8:18 PM, Jimmy Xiang <jx...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> At first, I am +1 for removing it. We had a similar discussion before, and
> didn't pull the plug because of Tim's comment:
>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hbase-dev/201212.mbox/%3CCAE9meBbH7V1PhSbeGtEpbXg1h5drbS+YdVyO0aKDR1d4JCE65Q@mail.gmail.com%3E
I am with Tim here (it was me that pushed Tim to complete this work in the first place).
> To me, instead of complete and maintain Thrift2, it will be much better to
> come up a new one since we are on PB now.
That is independent if you ask me. We should have a proper Thrift one, same with REST. Or do you want to toss out REST as well since we now have PB RPCs?
I am willing to work and maintain Thrift2, I said that before. This thread though got derailed in general wishful thinking, so could we please maybe vote if we want Thrift and more especially Thrift2. Because we either throw out Thrift in total for PB or maintain it for the time being.
Thoughts?
Cheers,
Lars
>
> Thanks,
> Jimmy
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>wrote:
>
>> I'm glad someone has stepped forward to be an active responsive maintainer
>> of this piece of code. Maintenance is one issue, actual usage is another.
>> Does anyone actually use this? What is the plan for Thrift? Do we continue
>> with both interfaces through one or more subsequent versions?
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Lars George <la...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I am -1 to remove, took a long time to get it in there and should
>>> deprecate Thrift v1 - or else we are in the same mess as mapred and
>>> mapreduce is. We once replaced the entire client API and now we can't do
>>> this for Thrift?
>>>
>>> I am happy to work on v2 and fix or maintain it. It should be the way
>>> forward methinks.
>>>
>>> Lars
>>>
>>> On Apr 24, 2013, at 21:53, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thrift2 was supposed to be the future -- an API like the native java
>> API
>>> --
>>>> but it never got the support needed to make it a superset of thrift1.
>>>> Meantime folks are running thrift1 in production and patching it as
>> they
>>>> need extra calls and fixes.
>>>>
>>>> While we have two thrifts, thrift1 and thrift2, the latter of which we
>>> are
>>>> afraid to recommend because we do not know of any prod install, we sew
>>>> confusion ("Which should I use?", "Doc only talks about 'thrift'?").
>>>>
>>>> HBASE-8184 is a patch to remove thrift2 until it gets a sponsor who can
>>>> move it beyond thrift1 . I already have a +1 to remove. Will let the
>>>> issue stew a day or two in case objection to thrift2 going away.
>>>>
>>>> St.Ack
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>>
>> - Andy
>>
>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
>> (via Tom White)
>>
Re: All ok w/ thrift2 going away in trunk/0.95?
Posted by Jimmy Xiang <jx...@cloudera.com>.
At first, I am +1 for removing it. We had a similar discussion before, and
didn't pull the plug because of Tim's comment:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hbase-dev/201212.mbox/%3CCAE9meBbH7V1PhSbeGtEpbXg1h5drbS+YdVyO0aKDR1d4JCE65Q@mail.gmail.com%3E
To me, instead of complete and maintain Thrift2, it will be much better to
come up a new one since we are on PB now.
Thanks,
Jimmy
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>wrote:
> I'm glad someone has stepped forward to be an active responsive maintainer
> of this piece of code. Maintenance is one issue, actual usage is another.
> Does anyone actually use this? What is the plan for Thrift? Do we continue
> with both interfaces through one or more subsequent versions?
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Lars George <la...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I am -1 to remove, took a long time to get it in there and should
> > deprecate Thrift v1 - or else we are in the same mess as mapred and
> > mapreduce is. We once replaced the entire client API and now we can't do
> > this for Thrift?
> >
> > I am happy to work on v2 and fix or maintain it. It should be the way
> > forward methinks.
> >
> > Lars
> >
> > On Apr 24, 2013, at 21:53, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> >
> > > Thrift2 was supposed to be the future -- an API like the native java
> API
> > --
> > > but it never got the support needed to make it a superset of thrift1.
> > > Meantime folks are running thrift1 in production and patching it as
> they
> > > need extra calls and fixes.
> > >
> > > While we have two thrifts, thrift1 and thrift2, the latter of which we
> > are
> > > afraid to recommend because we do not know of any prod install, we sew
> > > confusion ("Which should I use?", "Doc only talks about 'thrift'?").
> > >
> > > HBASE-8184 is a patch to remove thrift2 until it gets a sponsor who can
> > > move it beyond thrift1 . I already have a +1 to remove. Will let the
> > > issue stew a day or two in case objection to thrift2 going away.
> > >
> > > St.Ack
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
>
> - Andy
>
> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
> (via Tom White)
>
Re: All ok w/ thrift2 going away in trunk/0.95?
Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.
I'm glad someone has stepped forward to be an active responsive maintainer
of this piece of code. Maintenance is one issue, actual usage is another.
Does anyone actually use this? What is the plan for Thrift? Do we continue
with both interfaces through one or more subsequent versions?
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Lars George <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am -1 to remove, took a long time to get it in there and should
> deprecate Thrift v1 - or else we are in the same mess as mapred and
> mapreduce is. We once replaced the entire client API and now we can't do
> this for Thrift?
>
> I am happy to work on v2 and fix or maintain it. It should be the way
> forward methinks.
>
> Lars
>
> On Apr 24, 2013, at 21:53, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
>
> > Thrift2 was supposed to be the future -- an API like the native java API
> --
> > but it never got the support needed to make it a superset of thrift1.
> > Meantime folks are running thrift1 in production and patching it as they
> > need extra calls and fixes.
> >
> > While we have two thrifts, thrift1 and thrift2, the latter of which we
> are
> > afraid to recommend because we do not know of any prod install, we sew
> > confusion ("Which should I use?", "Doc only talks about 'thrift'?").
> >
> > HBASE-8184 is a patch to remove thrift2 until it gets a sponsor who can
> > move it beyond thrift1 . I already have a +1 to remove. Will let the
> > issue stew a day or two in case objection to thrift2 going away.
> >
> > St.Ack
>
--
Best regards,
- Andy
Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)
Re: All ok w/ thrift2 going away in trunk/0.95?
Posted by Lars George <la...@gmail.com>.
I am -1 to remove, took a long time to get it in there and should deprecate Thrift v1 - or else we are in the same mess as mapred and mapreduce is. We once replaced the entire client API and now we can't do this for Thrift?
I am happy to work on v2 and fix or maintain it. It should be the way forward methinks.
Lars
On Apr 24, 2013, at 21:53, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> Thrift2 was supposed to be the future -- an API like the native java API --
> but it never got the support needed to make it a superset of thrift1.
> Meantime folks are running thrift1 in production and patching it as they
> need extra calls and fixes.
>
> While we have two thrifts, thrift1 and thrift2, the latter of which we are
> afraid to recommend because we do not know of any prod install, we sew
> confusion ("Which should I use?", "Doc only talks about 'thrift'?").
>
> HBASE-8184 is a patch to remove thrift2 until it gets a sponsor who can
> move it beyond thrift1 . I already have a +1 to remove. Will let the
> issue stew a day or two in case objection to thrift2 going away.
>
> St.Ack
Re: All ok w/ thrift2 going away in trunk/0.95?
Posted by Sergey Polzunov <sp...@ripe.net>.
I've just found this one - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-3852
There is also a patch available, so we could have just used it.
Sergey
On 5/7/13 11:36 AM, Lars George wrote:
> Hi Sergey,
>
> Is there a JIRA for that? If not, would you be able to create one? Maybe even attach your patch?
>
> Appreciated.
>
> Lars
>
> On May 7, 2013, at 11:08, Sergey Polzunov <sp...@ripe.net> wrote:
>
>> There was a memory leak in hbase thrift2 server (cdh4.1.2 release).
>> scannerMap in ThriftHBaseServiceHandler will grow indefinitely if the
>> users forgot to close their scanners. So we added a few things:
>> - the scanner will be removed when there are no results left
>> - the scanner will be removed when (currentTime - latestAccessTime) >
>> hbaseClientTimeout
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Sergey
>>
>> On 5/7/13 10:41 AM, Lars George wrote:
>>> Thanks Sergey for chiming in. I am looking into the state of Thrift2 right now, but could you share with what you are referring to below, ie the fixes etc?
>>>
>>> Anything you know is missing?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Lars
>>>
>>> On May 7, 2013, at 10:26, Sergey Polzunov <sp...@ripe.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello
>>>>
>>>> We're using thrift2 in production (with a few fixes in hbase thrift2
>>>> server and a patch for HBASE-6073). So far it is a positive experience
>>>> and we would like to have thrfit2 support in the next releases
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Sergey
>>>>
>>>> On 4/24/13 9:53 PM, Stack wrote:
>>>>> Thrift2 was supposed to be the future -- an API like the native java API --
>>>>> but it never got the support needed to make it a superset of thrift1.
>>>>> Meantime folks are running thrift1 in production and patching it as they
>>>>> need extra calls and fixes.
>>>>>
>>>>> While we have two thrifts, thrift1 and thrift2, the latter of which we are
>>>>> afraid to recommend because we do not know of any prod install, we sew
>>>>> confusion ("Which should I use?", "Doc only talks about 'thrift'?").
>>>>>
>>>>> HBASE-8184 is a patch to remove thrift2 until it gets a sponsor who can
>>>>> move it beyond thrift1 . I already have a +1 to remove. Will let the
>>>>> issue stew a day or two in case objection to thrift2 going away.
>>>>>
>>>>> St.Ack
Re: All ok w/ thrift2 going away in trunk/0.95?
Posted by Lars George <la...@gmail.com>.
Hi Sergey,
Is there a JIRA for that? If not, would you be able to create one? Maybe even attach your patch?
Appreciated.
Lars
On May 7, 2013, at 11:08, Sergey Polzunov <sp...@ripe.net> wrote:
> There was a memory leak in hbase thrift2 server (cdh4.1.2 release).
> scannerMap in ThriftHBaseServiceHandler will grow indefinitely if the
> users forgot to close their scanners. So we added a few things:
> - the scanner will be removed when there are no results left
> - the scanner will be removed when (currentTime - latestAccessTime) >
> hbaseClientTimeout
>
> Cheers,
> Sergey
>
> On 5/7/13 10:41 AM, Lars George wrote:
>> Thanks Sergey for chiming in. I am looking into the state of Thrift2 right now, but could you share with what you are referring to below, ie the fixes etc?
>>
>> Anything you know is missing?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Lars
>>
>> On May 7, 2013, at 10:26, Sergey Polzunov <sp...@ripe.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Hello
>>>
>>> We're using thrift2 in production (with a few fixes in hbase thrift2
>>> server and a patch for HBASE-6073). So far it is a positive experience
>>> and we would like to have thrfit2 support in the next releases
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Sergey
>>>
>>> On 4/24/13 9:53 PM, Stack wrote:
>>>> Thrift2 was supposed to be the future -- an API like the native java API --
>>>> but it never got the support needed to make it a superset of thrift1.
>>>> Meantime folks are running thrift1 in production and patching it as they
>>>> need extra calls and fixes.
>>>>
>>>> While we have two thrifts, thrift1 and thrift2, the latter of which we are
>>>> afraid to recommend because we do not know of any prod install, we sew
>>>> confusion ("Which should I use?", "Doc only talks about 'thrift'?").
>>>>
>>>> HBASE-8184 is a patch to remove thrift2 until it gets a sponsor who can
>>>> move it beyond thrift1 . I already have a +1 to remove. Will let the
>>>> issue stew a day or two in case objection to thrift2 going away.
>>>>
>>>> St.Ack
>
Re: All ok w/ thrift2 going away in trunk/0.95?
Posted by Sergey Polzunov <sp...@ripe.net>.
There was a memory leak in hbase thrift2 server (cdh4.1.2 release).
scannerMap in ThriftHBaseServiceHandler will grow indefinitely if the
users forgot to close their scanners. So we added a few things:
- the scanner will be removed when there are no results left
- the scanner will be removed when (currentTime - latestAccessTime) >
hbaseClientTimeout
Cheers,
Sergey
On 5/7/13 10:41 AM, Lars George wrote:
> Thanks Sergey for chiming in. I am looking into the state of Thrift2 right now, but could you share with what you are referring to below, ie the fixes etc?
>
> Anything you know is missing?
>
> Thanks,
> Lars
>
> On May 7, 2013, at 10:26, Sergey Polzunov <sp...@ripe.net> wrote:
>
>> Hello
>>
>> We're using thrift2 in production (with a few fixes in hbase thrift2
>> server and a patch for HBASE-6073). So far it is a positive experience
>> and we would like to have thrfit2 support in the next releases
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Sergey
>>
>> On 4/24/13 9:53 PM, Stack wrote:
>>> Thrift2 was supposed to be the future -- an API like the native java API --
>>> but it never got the support needed to make it a superset of thrift1.
>>> Meantime folks are running thrift1 in production and patching it as they
>>> need extra calls and fixes.
>>>
>>> While we have two thrifts, thrift1 and thrift2, the latter of which we are
>>> afraid to recommend because we do not know of any prod install, we sew
>>> confusion ("Which should I use?", "Doc only talks about 'thrift'?").
>>>
>>> HBASE-8184 is a patch to remove thrift2 until it gets a sponsor who can
>>> move it beyond thrift1 . I already have a +1 to remove. Will let the
>>> issue stew a day or two in case objection to thrift2 going away.
>>>
>>> St.Ack
Re: All ok w/ thrift2 going away in trunk/0.95?
Posted by Lars George <la...@gmail.com>.
Thanks Sergey for chiming in. I am looking into the state of Thrift2 right now, but could you share with what you are referring to below, ie the fixes etc?
Anything you know is missing?
Thanks,
Lars
On May 7, 2013, at 10:26, Sergey Polzunov <sp...@ripe.net> wrote:
> Hello
>
> We're using thrift2 in production (with a few fixes in hbase thrift2
> server and a patch for HBASE-6073). So far it is a positive experience
> and we would like to have thrfit2 support in the next releases
>
> Thanks,
> Sergey
>
> On 4/24/13 9:53 PM, Stack wrote:
>> Thrift2 was supposed to be the future -- an API like the native java API --
>> but it never got the support needed to make it a superset of thrift1.
>> Meantime folks are running thrift1 in production and patching it as they
>> need extra calls and fixes.
>>
>> While we have two thrifts, thrift1 and thrift2, the latter of which we are
>> afraid to recommend because we do not know of any prod install, we sew
>> confusion ("Which should I use?", "Doc only talks about 'thrift'?").
>>
>> HBASE-8184 is a patch to remove thrift2 until it gets a sponsor who can
>> move it beyond thrift1 . I already have a +1 to remove. Will let the
>> issue stew a day or two in case objection to thrift2 going away.
>>
>> St.Ack
>
Re: All ok w/ thrift2 going away in trunk/0.95?
Posted by Andrew Purtell <ap...@apache.org>.
Thanks for writing. I change my earlier vote to +0.
On Tuesday, May 7, 2013, Sergey Polzunov wrote:
> Hello
>
> We're using thrift2 in production (with a few fixes in hbase thrift2
> server and a patch for HBASE-6073). So far it is a positive experience
> and we would like to have thrfit2 support in the next releases
>
> Thanks,
> Sergey
>
> On 4/24/13 9:53 PM, Stack wrote:
> > Thrift2 was supposed to be the future -- an API like the native java API
> --
> > but it never got the support needed to make it a superset of thrift1.
> > Meantime folks are running thrift1 in production and patching it as they
> > need extra calls and fixes.
> >
> > While we have two thrifts, thrift1 and thrift2, the latter of which we
> are
> > afraid to recommend because we do not know of any prod install, we sew
> > confusion ("Which should I use?", "Doc only talks about 'thrift'?").
> >
> > HBASE-8184 is a patch to remove thrift2 until it gets a sponsor who can
> > move it beyond thrift1 . I already have a +1 to remove. Will let the
> > issue stew a day or two in case objection to thrift2 going away.
> >
> > St.Ack
> >
>
>
--
Best regards,
- Andy
Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)
Re: All ok w/ thrift2 going away in trunk/0.95?
Posted by Sergey Polzunov <sp...@ripe.net>.
Hello
We're using thrift2 in production (with a few fixes in hbase thrift2
server and a patch for HBASE-6073). So far it is a positive experience
and we would like to have thrfit2 support in the next releases
Thanks,
Sergey
On 4/24/13 9:53 PM, Stack wrote:
> Thrift2 was supposed to be the future -- an API like the native java API --
> but it never got the support needed to make it a superset of thrift1.
> Meantime folks are running thrift1 in production and patching it as they
> need extra calls and fixes.
>
> While we have two thrifts, thrift1 and thrift2, the latter of which we are
> afraid to recommend because we do not know of any prod install, we sew
> confusion ("Which should I use?", "Doc only talks about 'thrift'?").
>
> HBASE-8184 is a patch to remove thrift2 until it gets a sponsor who can
> move it beyond thrift1 . I already have a +1 to remove. Will let the
> issue stew a day or two in case objection to thrift2 going away.
>
> St.Ack
>