accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Medinets <>
Subject Re: A discussion on scripts
Date Wed, 26 Sep 2012 11:54:11 GMT
I'm leaning towards the Chris's model of separate components. I like
that it has specific benefits. But, the best benefit for me is the
simplicity of separate scripts. For new accumulators, it will be
easier to understand each script.

On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 7:49 AM, Christopher Tubbs <> wrote:
> I'd like to see separate call scripts for each separate process. This
> is important for packaging, especially, so we can deliver components
> separately, and make it easier for users to deploy and configure the
> components that they want on each node of their cluster. I also think
> these should be separate from init scripts. (This doesn't mean they
> cannot inherit from a master script that takes parameters, but that
> should be transparent to the user.)
> What I'm thinking is that I want something like (config params
> optional, but with a sensible default location like those specified
> below):
> /usr/bin/accumulo-tserver --config=/etc/accumulo/tserver.conf
> /usr/bin/accumulo-master --config=/etc/accumulo/master.conf
> and for the shell
> /usr/bin/accumulo --config=~/.accumulo/config
> With init scripts that call the above scripts:
> /etc/init.d/accumulo-master start|stop|restart|status # calls the
> appropriate commands to start, kill, etc.
> /etc/init.d/accumulo-tserver start|stop|restart|status
> I'm fine with the /usr/bin/accumulo* being symlinks to our install
> location (/usr/lib/accumulo/bin?), but the scripts should assume
> default install locations (absolute paths, not relative paths), and
> take a single configuration file as an optional parameter. This config
> file should specify any locations that override the defaults. This
> pattern makes everything very explicit for the user, and very
> convenient to configure. It also makes writing RPMs/DEBs very easy,
> because we know where to put files by default where users will expect
> them.
> On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 2:04 PM, John Vines <> wrote:
>> I've been mulling ideas for script rework and one idea that I've been
>> leaning toward is a master script that all calls go through. It's not that
>> different from how we operate now, just things like start all, tup, etc all
>> get called through a single source. This would allow a single source for
>> script actions against Accumulo.
>> Just to be clear, this doesn't mean all of the code will necessarily be in
>> a single location. But it does mean we can remove code duplication in our
>> scripts.
>> The biggest con is the change in behavior. Though this may not be a bad
>> thing since we do have a lot of scripts in bin already, so it may improve
>> user experience as long as we make the usage info of the new script
>> informative enough.
>> What say ye, devs?
>> Sent from my phone, so pardon the typos and brevity.

View raw message