[jira] Commented: (HBASE-487) Replace hql w/ a hbase-friendly jirb or jython shell

["stack (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-487?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12584765#action_12584765 ] 

stack commented on HBASE-487:
-----------------------------

jython is easy enough to integrate. What about fact that you have to tab in shell when you want to write a little loop or that long lines can't be continued on next line with a '\'.  Does this make it unsuitable?

Looking at integrating jirb now.  Its more of a PITA integrating but no need of parens and more free-form would be more 'shell-like'.

What else should we be looking at?  Beanshell would be a sort of middle-ground; everyone would have to learn its syntax and you can do anything you could in jython/jirb and its easy to integrate

Was thinking that ./bin/hbase shell would put up the new shell, not HQL.  Would be a banner which said run './bin/hbase hql' to get old, deprecated shell

> Replace hql w/ a hbase-friendly jirb or jython shell
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-487
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-487
>             Project: Hadoop HBase
>          Issue Type: Wish
>            Reporter: stack
>            Assignee: stack
>            Priority: Minor
>
> The hbase shell is a useful admin and debugging tool but it has a couple of downsides.  To extend, a fragile parser definition needs tinkering-with and new java classes must be added.  The current test suite for hql is lacking coverage and the current code could do with a rewrite having evolved piecemeal.  Another downside is that the presence of an HQL interpreter gives the mis-impression that hbase is like a SQL database.
> This 'wish' issue suggests that we jettison HQL and instead offer users a jirb or jython command line.  We'd ship with some scripts and jruby/jython classes that we'd source on startup to do things like import base client classes -- so folks wouldn't have to remember all the packages stuff sat in -- and added a pretty-print for scanners and getters outputting text, xhtml or binary.  They would also make it easy to do HQL-things in jruby/python script.
> Advantages: Already-written parser with no need of extension probing deeper into hbase: i.e. better for debugging than HQL could ever be.  Easy extension adding scripts/modules rather than java code.  Less likely hbase could be confused for a SQL db.
> Downsides: Probably more verbose.  Requires ruby or python knowledge ("Everyone knows some sql").  Big? (jruby lib is 24M).
> I was going to write security as downside but HQL suffers this at the moment too -- though it has been possible to sort the updates from the selects in the UI to prevent modification of the db from the UI, something that would be hard to do in a jruby/jython parser.
> What do others think?

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.