You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@sentry.apache.org by "Ma, Junjie" <ju...@intel.com> on 2015/08/06 03:14:24 UTC
[DISCUSS] About clean up unnecessary ProviderBackend
Hi,
For the Sentry integration with Solr, Sqoop, I think the current backend provider for them is not necessary. SearchProviderBackend and SqoopProviderBackend should be replaced by SentryGenericProviderBackend. The SENTRY-828<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SENTRY-828> is to trace this.
But if we remove these ProviderBackend, user need to change the configuration file and it may be incompatible with the previous version, do you think this change is acceptable?
Best regards,
Colin Ma(Ma Jun Jie)
RE: [DISCUSS] About clean up unnecessary ProviderBackend
Posted by "Ma, Junjie" <ju...@intel.com>.
Good point, if SearchProviderBackend/SqoopProviderBackend is detected in the configuration file, we can do the automatically update. Thanks, Gregory.
Best regards,
Colin Ma(Ma Jun Jie)
-----Original Message-----
From: Gregory Chanan [mailto:gchanan@cloudera.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2015 9:55 AM
To: dev@sentry.incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] About clean up unnecessary ProviderBackend
Why does the user have to update the configuration file? I assume the SentryGenericProviderBackend has the same capabilities as the SearchProviderBackend/SqoopProviderBackend -- can't we just put in some code that detects the old configuration and automatically updates it to the new one? Maybe only if the old one isn't found?
Greg
On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 6:14 PM, Ma, Junjie <ju...@intel.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> For the Sentry integration with Solr, Sqoop, I think the
> current backend provider for them is not necessary.
> SearchProviderBackend and SqoopProviderBackend should be replaced by SentryGenericProviderBackend.
> The SENTRY-828<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SENTRY-828> is to
> trace this.
> But if we remove these ProviderBackend, user need to change
> the configuration file and it may be incompatible with the previous
> version, do you think this change is acceptable?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Colin Ma(Ma Jun Jie)
>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] About clean up unnecessary ProviderBackend
Posted by Gregory Chanan <gc...@cloudera.com>.
Why does the user have to update the configuration file? I assume the
SentryGenericProviderBackend has the same capabilities as the
SearchProviderBackend/SqoopProviderBackend -- can't we just put in some
code that detects the old configuration and automatically updates it to the
new one? Maybe only if the old one isn't found?
Greg
On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 6:14 PM, Ma, Junjie <ju...@intel.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> For the Sentry integration with Solr, Sqoop, I think the current
> backend provider for them is not necessary. SearchProviderBackend and
> SqoopProviderBackend should be replaced by SentryGenericProviderBackend.
> The SENTRY-828<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SENTRY-828> is to
> trace this.
> But if we remove these ProviderBackend, user need to change the
> configuration file and it may be incompatible with the previous version, do
> you think this change is acceptable?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Colin Ma(Ma Jun Jie)
>
>