accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From dlmar...@comcast.net
Subject Re: State of our RPCs
Date Tue, 01 Dec 2015 19:46:59 GMT
I'm not suggesting that we replace Thrift (nor am I signing up to do it), just asking for the
basis of the decision and if its time to revisit. I'm totally ok with a 'no' answer. 

----- Original Message -----

From: "Josh Elser" <josh.elser@gmail.com> 
To: dev@accumulo.apache.org 
Sent: Tuesday, December 1, 2015 2:36:18 PM 
Subject: Re: State of our RPCs 

To play devil's advocate: I'm not sure if it's quite that simple. For 
example, Avro has been around since 2009, but I don't think it'd be fair 
to consider Avro circa 2009 to Avro circa 2015. 

David Medinets wrote: 
> What new protocols have been introduced since the Thrift decisions? Can 
> someone provide pros and cons for that limited set of protocols? 
> 
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 1:02 PM,<dlmarion@comcast.net> wrote: 
> 
>> What was it about Thrift that drove us to use it? Was it the bindings for 
>> multiple languages? Should this decision be revisited? 
>> 
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> 
>> From: "Josh Elser"<josh.elser@gmail.com> 
>> To: "dev"<dev@accumulo.apache.org> 
>> Sent: Tuesday, December 1, 2015 12:49:26 PM 
>> Subject: State of our RPCs 
>> 
>> Hi -- 
>> 
>> My adventures in Thrift as a part of ACCUMULO-4065 are finally coming to 
>> a close, it seems. The briefest summary I can give is that our hack to 
>> work around an 0.9.0->0.9.1 compatibility issue ended up creating a bug 
>> in a very obtuse case (when a server answering a oneway Thrift call 
>> threw an RTE or an Error). 
>> 
>> Given some other recent chatter in the project, I'm left wondering: what 
>> next? 
>> 
>> We've long considered Thrift to be a very useful tool, but extremely 
>> scary to upgrade. I think this is just another sign of this. This leaves 
>> me asking, how do we fix this? 
>> 
>> Best as I understand it, Thrift is still a relatively active project (at 
>> least their mailing list archives shows it). My impression is that the 
>> Java library is much less-so. Most of our issues to me that they 
>> ultimately stem from incompatibilities between libthrift versions and 
>> uncaught performance regressions. 
>> 
>> Assuming that to be true, do we need to make a coordinated effort to 
>> improve the upstream libthrift code? Become a part of their community, 
>> focusing on preventing these sorts of issues from ever filtering down to 
>> us? Help them generate and follow compatibility guidelines? 
>> 
>> I feel like our strategy over the past few years has been to "avert your 
>> eyes" -- if we don't touch it, it'll hopefully be ok. Perhaps we need to 
>> try something new. Thoughts? 
>> 
>> - Josh 
>> 
>> 
> 


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