hadoop-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From stack <st...@duboce.net>
Subject Re: HTTP transport?
Date Tue, 29 Sep 2009 20:38:57 GMT
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 12:43 PM, Doug Cutting <cutting@apache.org> wrote:

> The question I'm asking now is about the wire format, whether we wish to
> precede each RPC request with something like "GET
> /avro/org.apache.hadoop.hdfs.NameNode HTTP/1.1\n" and each response with
> "HTTP/1.1 200 OK\n", plus a couple of other headers in each case (e.g.,
> Content-Type and Content-Length).  I think there are great benefits to using
> a single, standard protocol on the wire.  Which server and client
> implementations we use will be determined by performance, features, etc.
>  But using a standard wire format will greatly simplify things as we attempt
> to support multiple languages.  Since we want to provide browser access,
> we're compelled to support HTTP.  So the question is, are there compelling
> reasons why HTTP should not be used for other, non-browser, access?

I like the idea of using a proven transport.

The HTTP request and response header verbiage seems profligate if whats
being passed is small.

What do you think the path on the first line look like? Will it be a method
name or will it be customizable? (In hbase, it might be nice to have path be
/tablename/row/family/qualifier etc).


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