You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@zeppelin.apache.org by Jongyoul Lee <jo...@gmail.com> on 2017/01/23 05:15:37 UTC
[DISCUSS] Remove PostgresqlInterpreter
Hi all,
We, currently, have two kind of Interpreter supporting to connect DB which
are PostgresqlInterpreter and JDBCInterpreter. In history, JDBCInterpreter
is based on PostgresqlInterpeter and has the same function with it. I
suggest to remove PostgrsqlInterpreter in Zeppelin's code base because they
have same functions and JDBCInterpreter is now de facto standard. All new
contribution based on JDBC function is provided and added onto
JDBCInterpreter. In old times, I suggested same thing but it wouldn't be
accepted because PostgresqlInterpreter was better then JDBCInterpreter at
that time. But, now, JDBCInterpreter include all functions of
PostgresqlInterpreter and provide better functions.
How do you guys think of it? If it's accepted, 0.8.0 won't have
PostgresqlInterpreter anymore.
Regards,
Jongyoul Lee
--
이종열, Jongyoul Lee, 李宗烈
http://madeng.net
Re: [DISCUSS] Remove PostgresqlInterpreter
Posted by Jongyoul Lee <jo...@gmail.com>.
I created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZEPPELIN-2003
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 10:56 PM, Jongyoul Lee <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for replying it. I'll make a PR for doing it.
>
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 4:09 PM, Prabhjyot Singh <
> prabhjyotsingh@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> +1.
>>
>> Yes, agreed I too think its overhead, and all the features can be
>> achieved via JDBCInterpreter.
>>
>> On 23 January 2017 at 10:45, Jongyoul Lee <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> We, currently, have two kind of Interpreter supporting to connect DB
>>> which are PostgresqlInterpreter and JDBCInterpreter. In history,
>>> JDBCInterpreter is based on PostgresqlInterpeter and has the same function
>>> with it. I suggest to remove PostgrsqlInterpreter in Zeppelin's code base
>>> because they have same functions and JDBCInterpreter is now de facto
>>> standard. All new contribution based on JDBC function is provided and added
>>> onto JDBCInterpreter. In old times, I suggested same thing but it wouldn't
>>> be accepted because PostgresqlInterpreter was better then JDBCInterpreter
>>> at that time. But, now, JDBCInterpreter include all functions of
>>> PostgresqlInterpreter and provide better functions.
>>>
>>> How do you guys think of it? If it's accepted, 0.8.0 won't have
>>> PostgresqlInterpreter anymore.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Jongyoul Lee
>>>
>>> --
>>> 이종열, Jongyoul Lee, 李宗烈
>>> http://madeng.net
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Warm Regards,
>>
>> Prabhjyot Singh
>>
>
>
>
> --
> 이종열, Jongyoul Lee, 李宗烈
> http://madeng.net
>
--
이종열, Jongyoul Lee, 李宗烈
http://madeng.net
Re: [DISCUSS] Remove PostgresqlInterpreter
Posted by Jongyoul Lee <jo...@gmail.com>.
I created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZEPPELIN-2003
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 10:56 PM, Jongyoul Lee <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for replying it. I'll make a PR for doing it.
>
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 4:09 PM, Prabhjyot Singh <
> prabhjyotsingh@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> +1.
>>
>> Yes, agreed I too think its overhead, and all the features can be
>> achieved via JDBCInterpreter.
>>
>> On 23 January 2017 at 10:45, Jongyoul Lee <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> We, currently, have two kind of Interpreter supporting to connect DB
>>> which are PostgresqlInterpreter and JDBCInterpreter. In history,
>>> JDBCInterpreter is based on PostgresqlInterpeter and has the same function
>>> with it. I suggest to remove PostgrsqlInterpreter in Zeppelin's code base
>>> because they have same functions and JDBCInterpreter is now de facto
>>> standard. All new contribution based on JDBC function is provided and added
>>> onto JDBCInterpreter. In old times, I suggested same thing but it wouldn't
>>> be accepted because PostgresqlInterpreter was better then JDBCInterpreter
>>> at that time. But, now, JDBCInterpreter include all functions of
>>> PostgresqlInterpreter and provide better functions.
>>>
>>> How do you guys think of it? If it's accepted, 0.8.0 won't have
>>> PostgresqlInterpreter anymore.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Jongyoul Lee
>>>
>>> --
>>> 이종열, Jongyoul Lee, 李宗烈
>>> http://madeng.net
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Warm Regards,
>>
>> Prabhjyot Singh
>>
>
>
>
> --
> 이종열, Jongyoul Lee, 李宗烈
> http://madeng.net
>
--
이종열, Jongyoul Lee, 李宗烈
http://madeng.net
Re: [DISCUSS] Remove PostgresqlInterpreter
Posted by Jongyoul Lee <jo...@gmail.com>.
Thanks for replying it. I'll make a PR for doing it.
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 4:09 PM, Prabhjyot Singh <pr...@apache.org>
wrote:
> +1.
>
> Yes, agreed I too think its overhead, and all the features can be achieved
> via JDBCInterpreter.
>
> On 23 January 2017 at 10:45, Jongyoul Lee <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> We, currently, have two kind of Interpreter supporting to connect DB
>> which are PostgresqlInterpreter and JDBCInterpreter. In history,
>> JDBCInterpreter is based on PostgresqlInterpeter and has the same function
>> with it. I suggest to remove PostgrsqlInterpreter in Zeppelin's code base
>> because they have same functions and JDBCInterpreter is now de facto
>> standard. All new contribution based on JDBC function is provided and added
>> onto JDBCInterpreter. In old times, I suggested same thing but it wouldn't
>> be accepted because PostgresqlInterpreter was better then JDBCInterpreter
>> at that time. But, now, JDBCInterpreter include all functions of
>> PostgresqlInterpreter and provide better functions.
>>
>> How do you guys think of it? If it's accepted, 0.8.0 won't have
>> PostgresqlInterpreter anymore.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Jongyoul Lee
>>
>> --
>> 이종열, Jongyoul Lee, 李宗烈
>> http://madeng.net
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Warm Regards,
>
> Prabhjyot Singh
>
--
이종열, Jongyoul Lee, 李宗烈
http://madeng.net
Re: [DISCUSS] Remove PostgresqlInterpreter
Posted by Jongyoul Lee <jo...@gmail.com>.
Thanks for replying it. I'll make a PR for doing it.
On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 4:09 PM, Prabhjyot Singh <pr...@apache.org>
wrote:
> +1.
>
> Yes, agreed I too think its overhead, and all the features can be achieved
> via JDBCInterpreter.
>
> On 23 January 2017 at 10:45, Jongyoul Lee <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> We, currently, have two kind of Interpreter supporting to connect DB
>> which are PostgresqlInterpreter and JDBCInterpreter. In history,
>> JDBCInterpreter is based on PostgresqlInterpeter and has the same function
>> with it. I suggest to remove PostgrsqlInterpreter in Zeppelin's code base
>> because they have same functions and JDBCInterpreter is now de facto
>> standard. All new contribution based on JDBC function is provided and added
>> onto JDBCInterpreter. In old times, I suggested same thing but it wouldn't
>> be accepted because PostgresqlInterpreter was better then JDBCInterpreter
>> at that time. But, now, JDBCInterpreter include all functions of
>> PostgresqlInterpreter and provide better functions.
>>
>> How do you guys think of it? If it's accepted, 0.8.0 won't have
>> PostgresqlInterpreter anymore.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Jongyoul Lee
>>
>> --
>> 이종열, Jongyoul Lee, 李宗烈
>> http://madeng.net
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Warm Regards,
>
> Prabhjyot Singh
>
--
이종열, Jongyoul Lee, 李宗烈
http://madeng.net
Re: [DISCUSS] Remove PostgresqlInterpreter
Posted by Prabhjyot Singh <pr...@apache.org>.
+1.
Yes, agreed I too think its overhead, and all the features can be achieved
via JDBCInterpreter.
On 23 January 2017 at 10:45, Jongyoul Lee <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We, currently, have two kind of Interpreter supporting to connect DB which
> are PostgresqlInterpreter and JDBCInterpreter. In history, JDBCInterpreter
> is based on PostgresqlInterpeter and has the same function with it. I
> suggest to remove PostgrsqlInterpreter in Zeppelin's code base because they
> have same functions and JDBCInterpreter is now de facto standard. All new
> contribution based on JDBC function is provided and added onto
> JDBCInterpreter. In old times, I suggested same thing but it wouldn't be
> accepted because PostgresqlInterpreter was better then JDBCInterpreter at
> that time. But, now, JDBCInterpreter include all functions of
> PostgresqlInterpreter and provide better functions.
>
> How do you guys think of it? If it's accepted, 0.8.0 won't have
> PostgresqlInterpreter anymore.
>
> Regards,
> Jongyoul Lee
>
> --
> 이종열, Jongyoul Lee, 李宗烈
> http://madeng.net
>
--
Warm Regards,
Prabhjyot Singh
Re: [DISCUSS] Remove PostgresqlInterpreter
Posted by Prabhjyot Singh <pr...@apache.org>.
+1.
Yes, agreed I too think its overhead, and all the features can be achieved
via JDBCInterpreter.
On 23 January 2017 at 10:45, Jongyoul Lee <jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We, currently, have two kind of Interpreter supporting to connect DB which
> are PostgresqlInterpreter and JDBCInterpreter. In history, JDBCInterpreter
> is based on PostgresqlInterpeter and has the same function with it. I
> suggest to remove PostgrsqlInterpreter in Zeppelin's code base because they
> have same functions and JDBCInterpreter is now de facto standard. All new
> contribution based on JDBC function is provided and added onto
> JDBCInterpreter. In old times, I suggested same thing but it wouldn't be
> accepted because PostgresqlInterpreter was better then JDBCInterpreter at
> that time. But, now, JDBCInterpreter include all functions of
> PostgresqlInterpreter and provide better functions.
>
> How do you guys think of it? If it's accepted, 0.8.0 won't have
> PostgresqlInterpreter anymore.
>
> Regards,
> Jongyoul Lee
>
> --
> 이종열, Jongyoul Lee, 李宗烈
> http://madeng.net
>
--
Warm Regards,
Prabhjyot Singh