falcon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ying Zheng <yzh...@hortonworks.com>
Subject RE: [DISCUSS]: Moving recipe cooking to server
Date Thu, 12 Mar 2015 14:32:26 GMT
Perhaps I don't understand your question. JSP is one way to generate webpages. Why does it
need to run in Falcon server? It can be isolated from Falcon server, and developed and run
in Apache Tomcat server.


On Mar 12, 2015 12:53 AM, Srikanth Sundarrajan <sriksun@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi Ying,
    JSP would still run in Falcon server JVM, so not sure if that is any different from implementing
this natively inside the falcon server.

Srikanth Sundarrajan

> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS]: Moving recipe cooking to server
> From: yzheng@hortonworks.com
> To: dev@falcon.apache.org
> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 07:43:28 +0000
> Hi Sowmya, Srikanth, Venkatesh and Venkat,
> As far as I understand, recipe helps the user generate the process entity
> xml and it looks best to keep it a client side logic, as what you did
> before. The current question is how to run recipe logic on DR UI. To avoid
> repeating all the recipe logic in JS, one choice you can consider is JSP.
> JSP can be supported by Apache Tomcat server. If you package the recipe
> code into JAR, it can be reused in JSP. JS and CSS can also be included in
> the JSP page.
> Cheers,
> Ying
> On 3/11/15, 11:51 PM, "Srikanth Sundarrajan" <sriksun@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>Thanks Sowmya for capturing the discussion and also initiating this
>>conversation to drive consensus around the design. I am inclined towards
>>Approach 2.
>>Srikanth Sundarrajan
>>> Subject: [DISCUSS]: Moving recipe cooking to server
>>> From: sramesh@hortonworks.com
>>> To: dev@falcon.apache.org
>>> Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 05:17:16 +0000
>>> I had a discussion with Srikanth, Venkatesh and Venkat regarding making
>>>recipe processing server side concept. I am sending out the summary of
>>>the meeting and opening it for further discussion.
>>> Today Recipe cooking is a client side logic. Recipe also supports
>>>extensions i.e. user can cook his/her own custom recipes.
>>> Decision to make it client side logic was for the following reasons
>>> * Keep it isolated from falcon server
>>> * As custom recipe cooking is supported, user recipes can introduce
>>>security vulnerabilities and also can bring down the falcon server
>>> Today, falcon provides HDFS DR recipe out of the box. There is a plan
>>>to add UI support for DR in Falcon.
>>> Rest API support cannot be added for recipe as it is client side
>>> If the UI is pure java script[JS] then all the recipe cooking logic has
>>>to be repeated in JS. This is not a feasible solution - if more recipes
>>>are added say DR for hive, hbase and others, UI won't be extensible.
>>> For the above mentioned reasons Recipe should me made a server side
>>> Provided recipes [recipes provided out of the box] can run as Falcon
>>>process. Recipe cooking will be done in a new process if its custom
>>>recipe [user code].
>>> For cooking of custom recipes, design proposed should consider handling
>>>security implications, handling the issues where the custom user code
>>>can bring down the Falcon server (trapping System.exit), handling class
>>>path isolation.
>>> Also it shouldn't in anyway destabilize the Falcon system.
>>> There are couple of approaches which was discussed
>>> Approach 1:
>>> Custom Recipe cooking can be carried out separately in another Oozie
>>>WF, this will ensure isolation. Oozie already has the ability to
>>>schedule jobs as a user and handles all the security aspects of it.
>>> Pros:
>>> - Provides isolation
>>> - Piggyback on Oozie as it already provides the required functionality
>>> Cons:
>>> - As recipe processing is done in different WF, from operations point
>>>of view user cannot figure out recipe processing status and thus adds to
>>>the operational pain.
>>> Approach 2:
>>> Custom recipe cooking is done on the server side in a separate
>>>independent process than Falcon process I.e. It runs in a different JVM.
>>>Throttling should be added for how many recipe cooking processes can be
>>>launched keeping in mind the machine configuration.
>>> Pros:
>>> - Provides isolation as recipe cooking is done in a independent process
>>> Cons:
>>> - Performance overhead as new process is launched for custom recipe
>>> - Adds more complexity to the system
>>> Thoughts?
>>> Thanks,
>>> Sowmya

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