replacing HTD properties that duplicate config with HTD/HCD config

[Sergey Shelukhin <se...@hortonworks.com>]

Hi.
Ability to override configuration via HTD and HCD was added in
HBASE-7236/HBASE-7571 some time ago; now any setting used in HRegion (and
friends) can be overridden via HTD, and any setting used in HStore (and
friends) can be overridden via both HTD and HCD.
Last remaining unresolved child of HBASE-7236 is HBASE-7572, which would
remove existing HTD properties that duplicate configuration settings, such
as MAX_FILESIZE (with backward compat).
Arguably, some other properties on HCD and HTD that currently only exist
there would also make more sense as normal override-able configuration
settings.

What is your opinion on HBASE-7572 (not the patch but the general idea,
patch will probably need to be rebased by now)?
I want to either get it in some form, or resolve as not necessary, keeping
the old HTD fields.

Thanks.

Re: replacing HTD properties that duplicate config with HTD/HCD config

[Nick Dimiduk <nd...@gmail.com>]

I'm in favor of consolidating config points.  I think this kind of change
is valuable, hygienic; comments on RB.

On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Sergey Shelukhin <se...@hortonworks.com>wrote:

> Hi.
> Ability to override configuration via HTD and HCD was added in
> HBASE-7236/HBASE-7571 some time ago; now any setting used in HRegion (and
> friends) can be overridden via HTD, and any setting used in HStore (and
> friends) can be overridden via both HTD and HCD.
> Last remaining unresolved child of HBASE-7236 is HBASE-7572, which would
> remove existing HTD properties that duplicate configuration settings, such
> as MAX_FILESIZE (with backward compat).
> Arguably, some other properties on HCD and HTD that currently only exist
> there would also make more sense as normal override-able configuration
> settings.
>
> What is your opinion on HBASE-7572 (not the patch but the general idea,
> patch will probably need to be rebased by now)?
> I want to either get it in some form, or resolve as not necessary, keeping
> the old HTD fields.
>
> Thanks.
>