You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geode.apache.org by Dinesh Akhand <di...@amdocs.com> on 2017/09/14 11:42:51 UTC
[DISCUSS] GEODE-3617 Replace gemfire prefix with geode
Hi,
Why we are keeping gemfire in current geode 1.2 , Can we replace this with GEODE
File : DistributionConfig.java
Current code:
String GEMFIRE_PREFIX = "gemfire.";
Suggestion to change:
String GEODE_PREFIX = "geode.";
Why do you think ?
Can we go ahead and change this ?
It will impact lots of files & all configuration will be now using with geode.
Thanks,
Dinesh Akhand
This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement,
you may review at https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer <https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer>
Re: [DISCUSS] GEODE-3617 Replace gemfire prefix with geode
Posted by Swapnil Bawaskar <sb...@pivotal.io>.
In the interest of keeping the re-branding tasks together, I took the
liberty to made GEODE-3617 a subtask of
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-1466.
On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 2:05 PM Dave Barnes <db...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> Here's an updated link to the properties spreadsheet that should have wider
> viewability:
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1C2D7cpcYMy5bd0aXXReJn6wWsBuLZrCegl7_cevvKo0/edit?usp=sharing
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 12:10 PM, Dave Barnes <db...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>
> > There's no single list of "all properties". Here's one that Tech Pubs
> last
> > reviewed about 6 months ago...
> >
> > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1C2D7cpcYMy5bd0aXXReJn6wWsBuLZ
> > rCegl7_cevvKo0/edit#gid=0
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 12:06 PM, Bruce Schuchardt <
> bschuchardt@pivotal.io
> > > wrote:
> >
> >> There are plenty of places besides DistributionConfig that use "gemfire"
> >> prefixed system properties and there are now also places that use
> "geode"
> >> prefixed system properties. I think the whole mess needs to be managed
> and
> >> allow either prefix, or even as someone suggested making it plug-able.
> >> There is also an HTML file that, now out of date, lists most of these
> >> system properties.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 9/14/17 10:14 AM, Darrel Schneider wrote:
> >>
> >>> +1 to having DistributionConfig look for both the "gemfire." and
> "geode."
> >>> prefixes.
> >>> +1 to having DistributionConfig look for both a "gemfire.properties"
> and
> >>> "geode.properties" file.
> >>> Since the geode flavors are newer it should look for them first and
> only
> >>> look for the old gemfire flavor if a geode one is not found.
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 9:35 AM, Kirk Lund <kl...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> That's a bigger change and I'm not sure how you would handle backwards
> >>>> compatibility for users using gemfire.properties.
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 9:15 AM, Jacob Barrett <jb...@pivotal.io>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Or better yet, we stop using properties files already.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 8:55 AM Dave Barnes <db...@pivotal.io>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Is there a possibility that the code might find its way into
> additional
> >>>>>> contexts with other names? If so, perhaps we should consider a more
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> generic
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> identifier, such as PRODUCT_PREFIX.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 4:42 AM, Dinesh Akhand <dineshak@amdocs.com
> >
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hi,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Why we are keeping gemfire in current geode 1.2 , Can we replace
> this
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> with
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> GEODE
> >>>>>>> File : DistributionConfig.java
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Current code:
> >>>>>>> String GEMFIRE_PREFIX = "gemfire.";
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Suggestion to change:
> >>>>>>> String GEODE_PREFIX = "geode.";
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Why do you think ?
> >>>>>>> Can we go ahead and change this ?
> >>>>>>> It will impact lots of files & all configuration will be now using
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> with
> >>>>
> >>>>> geode.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks,
> >>>>>>> Dinesh Akhand
> >>>>>>> This message and the information contained herein is proprietary
> and
> >>>>>>> confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> you may review at https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer <
> >>>>>>> https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] GEODE-3617 Replace gemfire prefix with geode
Posted by Dave Barnes <db...@pivotal.io>.
Here's an updated link to the properties spreadsheet that should have wider
viewability:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1C2D7cpcYMy5bd0aXXReJn6wWsBuLZrCegl7_cevvKo0/edit?usp=sharing
On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 12:10 PM, Dave Barnes <db...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> There's no single list of "all properties". Here's one that Tech Pubs last
> reviewed about 6 months ago...
>
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1C2D7cpcYMy5bd0aXXReJn6wWsBuLZ
> rCegl7_cevvKo0/edit#gid=0
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 12:06 PM, Bruce Schuchardt <bschuchardt@pivotal.io
> > wrote:
>
>> There are plenty of places besides DistributionConfig that use "gemfire"
>> prefixed system properties and there are now also places that use "geode"
>> prefixed system properties. I think the whole mess needs to be managed and
>> allow either prefix, or even as someone suggested making it plug-able.
>> There is also an HTML file that, now out of date, lists most of these
>> system properties.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 9/14/17 10:14 AM, Darrel Schneider wrote:
>>
>>> +1 to having DistributionConfig look for both the "gemfire." and "geode."
>>> prefixes.
>>> +1 to having DistributionConfig look for both a "gemfire.properties" and
>>> "geode.properties" file.
>>> Since the geode flavors are newer it should look for them first and only
>>> look for the old gemfire flavor if a geode one is not found.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 9:35 AM, Kirk Lund <kl...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> That's a bigger change and I'm not sure how you would handle backwards
>>>> compatibility for users using gemfire.properties.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 9:15 AM, Jacob Barrett <jb...@pivotal.io>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Or better yet, we stop using properties files already.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 8:55 AM Dave Barnes <db...@pivotal.io>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there a possibility that the code might find its way into additional
>>>>>> contexts with other names? If so, perhaps we should consider a more
>>>>>>
>>>>> generic
>>>>>
>>>>>> identifier, such as PRODUCT_PREFIX.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 4:42 AM, Dinesh Akhand <di...@amdocs.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why we are keeping gemfire in current geode 1.2 , Can we replace this
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> with
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> GEODE
>>>>>>> File : DistributionConfig.java
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Current code:
>>>>>>> String GEMFIRE_PREFIX = "gemfire.";
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Suggestion to change:
>>>>>>> String GEODE_PREFIX = "geode.";
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why do you think ?
>>>>>>> Can we go ahead and change this ?
>>>>>>> It will impact lots of files & all configuration will be now using
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> with
>>>>
>>>>> geode.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Dinesh Akhand
>>>>>>> This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and
>>>>>>> confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> you may review at https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer <
>>>>>>> https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] GEODE-3617 Replace gemfire prefix with geode
Posted by Dave Barnes <db...@pivotal.io>.
There's no single list of "all properties". Here's one that Tech Pubs last
reviewed about 6 months ago...
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1C2D7cpcYMy5bd0aXXReJn6wWsBuLZrCegl7_cevvKo0/edit#gid=0
On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 12:06 PM, Bruce Schuchardt <bs...@pivotal.io>
wrote:
> There are plenty of places besides DistributionConfig that use "gemfire"
> prefixed system properties and there are now also places that use "geode"
> prefixed system properties. I think the whole mess needs to be managed and
> allow either prefix, or even as someone suggested making it plug-able.
> There is also an HTML file that, now out of date, lists most of these
> system properties.
>
>
>
> On 9/14/17 10:14 AM, Darrel Schneider wrote:
>
>> +1 to having DistributionConfig look for both the "gemfire." and "geode."
>> prefixes.
>> +1 to having DistributionConfig look for both a "gemfire.properties" and
>> "geode.properties" file.
>> Since the geode flavors are newer it should look for them first and only
>> look for the old gemfire flavor if a geode one is not found.
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 9:35 AM, Kirk Lund <kl...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> That's a bigger change and I'm not sure how you would handle backwards
>>> compatibility for users using gemfire.properties.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 9:15 AM, Jacob Barrett <jb...@pivotal.io>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Or better yet, we stop using properties files already.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 8:55 AM Dave Barnes <db...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Is there a possibility that the code might find its way into additional
>>>>> contexts with other names? If so, perhaps we should consider a more
>>>>>
>>>> generic
>>>>
>>>>> identifier, such as PRODUCT_PREFIX.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 4:42 AM, Dinesh Akhand <di...@amdocs.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why we are keeping gemfire in current geode 1.2 , Can we replace this
>>>>>>
>>>>> with
>>>>>
>>>>>> GEODE
>>>>>> File : DistributionConfig.java
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Current code:
>>>>>> String GEMFIRE_PREFIX = "gemfire.";
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Suggestion to change:
>>>>>> String GEODE_PREFIX = "geode.";
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why do you think ?
>>>>>> Can we go ahead and change this ?
>>>>>> It will impact lots of files & all configuration will be now using
>>>>>>
>>>>> with
>>>
>>>> geode.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Dinesh Akhand
>>>>>> This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and
>>>>>> confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> you may review at https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer <
>>>>>> https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] GEODE-3617 Replace gemfire prefix with geode
Posted by Bruce Schuchardt <bs...@pivotal.io>.
There are plenty of places besides DistributionConfig that use "gemfire"
prefixed system properties and there are now also places that use
"geode" prefixed system properties. I think the whole mess needs to be
managed and allow either prefix, or even as someone suggested making it
plug-able. There is also an HTML file that, now out of date, lists most
of these system properties.
On 9/14/17 10:14 AM, Darrel Schneider wrote:
> +1 to having DistributionConfig look for both the "gemfire." and "geode."
> prefixes.
> +1 to having DistributionConfig look for both a "gemfire.properties" and
> "geode.properties" file.
> Since the geode flavors are newer it should look for them first and only
> look for the old gemfire flavor if a geode one is not found.
>
> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 9:35 AM, Kirk Lund <kl...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> That's a bigger change and I'm not sure how you would handle backwards
>> compatibility for users using gemfire.properties.
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 9:15 AM, Jacob Barrett <jb...@pivotal.io>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Or better yet, we stop using properties files already.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 8:55 AM Dave Barnes <db...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Is there a possibility that the code might find its way into additional
>>>> contexts with other names? If so, perhaps we should consider a more
>>> generic
>>>> identifier, such as PRODUCT_PREFIX.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 4:42 AM, Dinesh Akhand <di...@amdocs.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> Why we are keeping gemfire in current geode 1.2 , Can we replace this
>>>> with
>>>>> GEODE
>>>>> File : DistributionConfig.java
>>>>>
>>>>> Current code:
>>>>> String GEMFIRE_PREFIX = "gemfire.";
>>>>>
>>>>> Suggestion to change:
>>>>> String GEODE_PREFIX = "geode.";
>>>>>
>>>>> Why do you think ?
>>>>> Can we go ahead and change this ?
>>>>> It will impact lots of files & all configuration will be now using
>> with
>>>>> geode.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Dinesh Akhand
>>>>> This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and
>>>>> confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement,
>>>>>
>>>>> you may review at https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer <
>>>>> https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer>
>>>>>
Re: [DISCUSS] GEODE-3617 Replace gemfire prefix with geode
Posted by Darrel Schneider <ds...@pivotal.io>.
+1 to having DistributionConfig look for both the "gemfire." and "geode."
prefixes.
+1 to having DistributionConfig look for both a "gemfire.properties" and
"geode.properties" file.
Since the geode flavors are newer it should look for them first and only
look for the old gemfire flavor if a geode one is not found.
On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 9:35 AM, Kirk Lund <kl...@apache.org> wrote:
> That's a bigger change and I'm not sure how you would handle backwards
> compatibility for users using gemfire.properties.
>
> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 9:15 AM, Jacob Barrett <jb...@pivotal.io>
> wrote:
>
> > Or better yet, we stop using properties files already.
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 8:55 AM Dave Barnes <db...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> >
> > > Is there a possibility that the code might find its way into additional
> > > contexts with other names? If so, perhaps we should consider a more
> > generic
> > > identifier, such as PRODUCT_PREFIX.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 4:42 AM, Dinesh Akhand <di...@amdocs.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > Why we are keeping gemfire in current geode 1.2 , Can we replace this
> > > with
> > > > GEODE
> > > > File : DistributionConfig.java
> > > >
> > > > Current code:
> > > > String GEMFIRE_PREFIX = "gemfire.";
> > > >
> > > > Suggestion to change:
> > > > String GEODE_PREFIX = "geode.";
> > > >
> > > > Why do you think ?
> > > > Can we go ahead and change this ?
> > > > It will impact lots of files & all configuration will be now using
> with
> > > > geode.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Dinesh Akhand
> > > > This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and
> > > > confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement,
> > > >
> > > > you may review at https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer <
> > > > https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] GEODE-3617 Replace gemfire prefix with geode
Posted by Kirk Lund <kl...@apache.org>.
That's a bigger change and I'm not sure how you would handle backwards
compatibility for users using gemfire.properties.
On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 9:15 AM, Jacob Barrett <jb...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> Or better yet, we stop using properties files already.
>
> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 8:55 AM Dave Barnes <db...@pivotal.io> wrote:
>
> > Is there a possibility that the code might find its way into additional
> > contexts with other names? If so, perhaps we should consider a more
> generic
> > identifier, such as PRODUCT_PREFIX.
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 4:42 AM, Dinesh Akhand <di...@amdocs.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Why we are keeping gemfire in current geode 1.2 , Can we replace this
> > with
> > > GEODE
> > > File : DistributionConfig.java
> > >
> > > Current code:
> > > String GEMFIRE_PREFIX = "gemfire.";
> > >
> > > Suggestion to change:
> > > String GEODE_PREFIX = "geode.";
> > >
> > > Why do you think ?
> > > Can we go ahead and change this ?
> > > It will impact lots of files & all configuration will be now using with
> > > geode.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Dinesh Akhand
> > > This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and
> > > confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement,
> > >
> > > you may review at https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer <
> > > https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer>
> > >
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] GEODE-3617 Replace gemfire prefix with geode
Posted by Jacob Barrett <jb...@pivotal.io>.
Or better yet, we stop using properties files already.
On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 8:55 AM Dave Barnes <db...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> Is there a possibility that the code might find its way into additional
> contexts with other names? If so, perhaps we should consider a more generic
> identifier, such as PRODUCT_PREFIX.
>
> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 4:42 AM, Dinesh Akhand <di...@amdocs.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Why we are keeping gemfire in current geode 1.2 , Can we replace this
> with
> > GEODE
> > File : DistributionConfig.java
> >
> > Current code:
> > String GEMFIRE_PREFIX = "gemfire.";
> >
> > Suggestion to change:
> > String GEODE_PREFIX = "geode.";
> >
> > Why do you think ?
> > Can we go ahead and change this ?
> > It will impact lots of files & all configuration will be now using with
> > geode.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Dinesh Akhand
> > This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and
> > confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement,
> >
> > you may review at https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer <
> > https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer>
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] GEODE-3617 Replace gemfire prefix with geode
Posted by Kirk Lund <kl...@apache.org>.
Whoever takes this work on will need to spend time figuring out a way to
make it pluggable and support multiple prefixes possibly with pluggable
order of preference. For example, we would need to support looking for
geode.properties and gemfire.properties or it would break backwards
compatibility for users.
On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 8:55 AM, Dave Barnes <db...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> Is there a possibility that the code might find its way into additional
> contexts with other names? If so, perhaps we should consider a more generic
> identifier, such as PRODUCT_PREFIX.
>
> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 4:42 AM, Dinesh Akhand <di...@amdocs.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Why we are keeping gemfire in current geode 1.2 , Can we replace this
> with
> > GEODE
> > File : DistributionConfig.java
> >
> > Current code:
> > String GEMFIRE_PREFIX = "gemfire.";
> >
> > Suggestion to change:
> > String GEODE_PREFIX = "geode.";
> >
> > Why do you think ?
> > Can we go ahead and change this ?
> > It will impact lots of files & all configuration will be now using with
> > geode.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Dinesh Akhand
> > This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and
> > confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement,
> >
> > you may review at https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer <
> > https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer>
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] GEODE-3617 Replace gemfire prefix with geode
Posted by Dave Barnes <db...@pivotal.io>.
Is there a possibility that the code might find its way into additional
contexts with other names? If so, perhaps we should consider a more generic
identifier, such as PRODUCT_PREFIX.
On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 4:42 AM, Dinesh Akhand <di...@amdocs.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Why we are keeping gemfire in current geode 1.2 , Can we replace this with
> GEODE
> File : DistributionConfig.java
>
> Current code:
> String GEMFIRE_PREFIX = "gemfire.";
>
> Suggestion to change:
> String GEODE_PREFIX = "geode.";
>
> Why do you think ?
> Can we go ahead and change this ?
> It will impact lots of files & all configuration will be now using with
> geode.
>
> Thanks,
> Dinesh Akhand
> This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and
> confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement,
>
> you may review at https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer <
> https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer>
>