accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Berman <mber...@sqrrl.com>
Subject Re: client config files
Date Fri, 02 Aug 2013 19:24:38 GMT
I believe it is an implementation overlap.  Both ZKInstance and the
master-tablet thrift connections get created in ThriftUtil.getClient().
 Higher up in the stack, in both paths, we have access to an Instance from
which to draw configuration (with getConfiguration()).  In one case, it's a
ZKInstance with a degenerate AccumuloConfiguration, and in the other case
it's an HDFSInstance with a site.xml-backed configuration, but the thrift
stack makes no distinction.  It seems silly to me to introduce a
distinction all the way down the stack just so we can have two different
config sources (which have many of the same flags).  Unless we were going
to implement it as a ThriftConnectionConfiguration interface with named
methods that both AccumuloConfiguration and ClientConfiguration could
implement...but that would be a big departure from the Property enum
configuration model.


On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 2:29 PM, Joey Echeverria <joey@cloudera.com> wrote:

> Yeah, I agree. Consistency with Hadoop here is probably not that valuable.
>
> -Joey
>
> On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 2:28 PM, Keith Turner <keith@deenlo.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Joey Echeverria <joey@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> I generally prefer properties files to XML, but there may be a argument
> >> for reusing Hadoop's SSL configuration system which is XML based.
> >>
> >
> > I also prefer prefer properties files over XML.   The only reason I can
> > think that we might want to use XML is for consistency with Hadoop and
> > Accumulo server side config.  But it does not seem like a very compelling
> > reason, its not like it prop files are hard to use once you realize you
> > need to use them.
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> -Joey
> >> —
> >> Sent from Mailbox for iPhone
> >>
> >> On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Christopher <ctubbsii@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > ^ Another reason I like commons-configuration here is for
> >> > property-interpolation with HierarchicalConfiguration.
> >> > --
> >> > Christopher L Tubbs II
> >> > http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
> >> > On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Christopher <ctubbsii@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >> >> I absolutely DO think they should be combined in a properties file
> >> >> located in $HOME/.accumulo/config
> >> >> I absolutely DO NOT think this client configuration should be
> >> >> exclusive to the shell, and I absolutely DO NOT think it should be
> >> >> XML.
> >> >>
> >> >> I would love to see all our clients/client code use
> >> >> commons-configuration to hold properties from the properties file,
so
> >> >> that only a --config parameter is needed (with reasonable defaults,
> so
> >> >> even that is not absolutely necessary). I also think that every
> >> >> property that can exist in the file should be possible to override
on
> >> >> the command-line. I personally prefer to use system properties, using
> >> >> commons-configuration's HierarchicalConfiguration, but jcommander may
> >> >> make it easier to do the same thing in a slightly different way.
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> Christopher L Tubbs II
> >> >> http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 12:25 PM, Michael Berman <mberman@sqrrl.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >>> As part of SSL, we need to introduce configuration so accumulo
> clients
> >> >>> (such as ZooKeeperInstance) can find trust stores.  It seems like
> this
> >> has
> >> >>> a lot in common with shell config files in ACCUMULO-1397.  Do people
> >> think
> >> >>> these should be combined, or should the shell have its own separate
> >> config?
> >> >>>  I was imagining a simple java .properties-style key=value list.
>  Does
> >> this
> >> >>> seem reasonable?  Or should the format be more like the xml of
the
> site
> >> >>> config?  I was also imagining looking through a list of files that
> >> would
> >> >>> each override settings, perhaps in the following order (from lowest
> to
> >> >>> highest priority):
> >> >>>
> >> >>> /etc/accumulo/client.conf
> >> >>> $ACCUMULO_HOME/conf/client.conf
> >> >>> $HOME/.accumulo/config
> >> >>> --client-config command line switch for shell or explicit parameter
> >> passed
> >> >>> to ZooKeeperInstance
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Does this sound good to y'all?  Should the explicit switch/parameter
> >> have
> >> >>> per-property override semantics, or should it just be used as the
> >> exclusive
> >> >>> source of properties if specified?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Mike Drob, are you actively working on the shell side of this
> already?
> >>  I
> >> >>> see that bug is assigned to you...
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Thanks,
> >> >>> Michael
> >>
>
>
>
> --
> Joey Echeverria
> Director, Federal FTS
> Cloudera, Inc.
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message