accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christopher <>
Subject Re: client config files
Date Thu, 01 Aug 2013 19:08:49 GMT
^ Another reason I like commons-configuration here is for
property-interpolation with HierarchicalConfiguration.

Christopher L Tubbs II

On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Christopher <> 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
> On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 12:25 PM, Michael Berman <> 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

View raw message