accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Medinets <>
Subject Re: State of our RPCs
Date Tue, 01 Dec 2015 18:40:00 GMT
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, <> 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" <>
> To: "dev" <>
> 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

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