accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Josh Elser <josh.el...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] MiniAccumuloCluster goals and approach
Date Fri, 28 Mar 2014 20:04:55 GMT
Forgot to also add, that I would add the experimental annotation to
alleviate confusion.

The already mocked minimum set of methods on the interface which I posted
to github Is a first pass. If we miss something that is in fact common, we
can add it later, anything else is likely destined for the implementation.

On Friday, March 28, 2014, Keith Turner <keith@deenlo.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 3:14 PM, Josh Elser <josh.elser@gmail.com<javascript:;>>
> wrote:
>
> > Not even the addition of a new interface, Christopher? I'd very much like
> > to have an interface that we can get in 1.6.0 at a minimum. I wouldn't
> even
> > push for any deprecation of what's currently in place.
> >
>
> W/o deprecation it seems very confusing.   The intent is that users should
> use the new one, but the old one is not deprecated.  If someone is
> completely new to this, how will they know which option to use?
>
> Once you get down in the weeds of working on this, do you think you might
> end wanting something very different?
>
>
>
> > On Mar 28, 2014 10:02 AM, "Christopher" <ctubbsii@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > I don't think any of this should be done for 1.6.0, but I like the
> > > idea of creating a separate cluster interface for testing. I think it
> > > should be integrated into the accumulo-maven-plugin, also. I think the
> > > idea should be hammered out, and tested as a separate thing, to
> > > experiment with the options, and provided as a complete feature for
> > > the next major release. If it would change packaging dependencies, it
> > > shouldn't even be done for 1.6.x bugfix releases.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Christopher L Tubbs II
> > > http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 12:24 PM, Josh Elser <josh.elser@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > Oh, I like that idea, Bill & Sean.
> > > >
> > > > Package: org.apache.accumulo.cluster
> > > > Public API: org.apache.accumulo.cluster.AccumuloCluster
> > > > MAC: org.apache.accumulo.cluster.mini.MiniAccumuloCluster (implements
> > > > AccumuloCluster, allows for backwards compat)
> > > > Yarn: org.apache.accumulo.cluster.yarn
> > > > Docker: ...
> > > > Mesos: ...
> > > >
> > > > etc etc etc.
> > > >
> > > > One question in my mind, do we keep the maven module
> > > 'accumulo-minicluster'?
> > > > I would imagine that if we struck the 'mini' portion from 1.6 that
> > would
> > > > create some confusion. Would it be worth the indirection to rename
> > > > accumulo-minicluster to accumulo-cluster and then create a new
> > > > accumulo-minicluster module that depends on accumulo-minicluster (but
> > > > contains no code itself) to preserve the 1.4 and 1.5 poms to
> generally
> > > work
> > > > with a version bump? I'm not sure if Maven would be happy with that
> or
> > do
> > > > what I think it "should".
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 3/28/14, 6:26 AM, Bill Havanki wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> I've been watching the conversation on the side, but I wanted to
> > mention
> > > >> that it seems the focus isn't so much on "mini" clusters anymore.
> > You're
> > > >> thinking of programmatic cluster management, whether one node or
> many.
> > > The
> > > >> idea of a basic cluster management interface, with MAC as an
> > > >> implementation, is promising. A package name of just "cluster" could
> > > work.
> > > >>
> > > >> Carry on :)
> > > >>
> > > >> Bill H
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 12:39 AM, Sean Busbey
> > > >> <busbey+lists@cloudera.com>wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> If you decide to go the mapred/mapreduce way, you could go with
the
> > > >>> package
> > > >>> name "mini".
> > > >>>
> > > >>> alternatively, we can do a multi-stage change out
> > > >>>
> > > >>> 1)  1.6.x:  introduce TestAccumuloCluster interface, @deprecate
> > > >>> MiniAccumuloCluster class and make it implement TestAccumuloCluster
> > > >>>
> > > >>> 2) 1.6 + major: change MiniAccumuloCluster to an interface that
> > extends
> > > >>> TestAccumuloCluster, @deprecate TestAccumuloCluster
> > > >>>
> > > >>> 3) 1.6 + 2 major: remove TestAccumuloCluster
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Or just go with TestAccumuloCluster as the interface, have
> > > >>> MiniAccumuloCluster as the local pseudo distributed implementation,
> > and
> > > >>> then call your new one something like YarnAccumuloCluster.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> In that case we could use the deprecation cycle to move the MAC
> class
> > > out
> > > >>> of the public api.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 6:48 PM, Josh Elser <

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