accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From John Vines <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] MiniAccumuloCluster goals and approach
Date Wed, 26 Mar 2014 18:17:30 GMT
I think it would be best if you could throw a different MACConfig at it to
have it vary in behavior, rather then different implementations. I'd like
to think that this would provide the most backward compatibility and ease
of use, but I could be mistaken.

On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 2:05 PM, Josh Elser <> wrote:

> On 3/26/14, 10:57 AM, Keith Turner wrote:
>> Can you give an example of what you are thinking of? I don't understand
>> you
>> viewpoint either
> Sure. One limitation of MAC, in general as a testing harness, is that it
> doesn't adequately exercise multi-node implementations. You can run
> multiple tservers, but they are all on the same host which limits the
> validity of a "robust" test. This is my immediate goal.
> Multi-node deployments are capable using something like Mesos or Yarn.
> Given that there is already functioning support to deploy Accumulo on Yarn,
> this was my goal.
> My goal is to be able to have the ability to run all of our AbstractMacIT
> implementations against "real" hardware without changing a single line of
> test code (ok - maybe a line or two to do injection of the MAC
> implementation). The point is, I believe there could be a huge testing gain
> from being able to write tests which leverage yarn, have the same
> programmatic configuration API from MAC, and provide near "real" Accumulo
> semantics.

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