hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "stack (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (HBASE-487) Replace hql w/ a hbase-friendly jirb or jython shell
Date Fri, 23 May 2008 17:41:55 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-487?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12599445#action_12599445

stack commented on HBASE-487:

I'm fine w/ ruby hashes.  Fine also w/ no describe table_name col_family in first version.
 Same for regex.

Your output is missing row spec.  Or, outputting in hql, if row was specified in query, I
would output just column and cell -- no rowspec -- but when say, scanning, then you needed
the three rows.  Also missing is timestamp (Now its available, lets add it to output)

In hql, you could specify a table formatter.  There were two types: ascii table and xhtml
(Former was default; latter was used outputting content in the hql ui page and often useful
when you needed to parse a big result).  Going forward we should be able to add other formatter
types and formatters (no formatting with tab delimiters, no column headers, json, etc.)  At
least ascii and probably xhtml are needed in the first version I'd say.

Would suggest you clean up your proposal and put it up on http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/Hbase/Shell/Replacement
or into a new page.  Add your distinction between hql and this dsl somewhere as a bolded design

> Replace hql w/ a hbase-friendly jirb or jython shell
> ----------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: HBASE-487
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-487
>             Project: Hadoop HBase
>          Issue Type: Wish
>            Reporter: stack
>            Assignee: stack
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 0.2.0
>         Attachments: groovy-2.patch, groovy.patch, jruby.patch
> The hbase shell is a useful admin and debugging tool but it has a couple of downsides.
 To extend, a fragile parser definition needs tinkering-with and new java classes must be
added.  The current test suite for hql is lacking coverage and the current code could do with
a rewrite having evolved piecemeal.  Another downside is that the presence of an HQL interpreter
gives the mis-impression that hbase is like a SQL database.
> This 'wish' issue suggests that we jettison HQL and instead offer users a jirb or jython
command line.  We'd ship with some scripts and jruby/jython classes that we'd source on startup
to do things like import base client classes -- so folks wouldn't have to remember all the
packages stuff sat in -- and added a pretty-print for scanners and getters outputting text,
xhtml or binary.  They would also make it easy to do HQL-things in jruby/python script.
> Advantages: Already-written parser with no need of extension probing deeper into hbase:
i.e. better for debugging than HQL could ever be.  Easy extension adding scripts/modules rather
than java code.  Less likely hbase could be confused for a SQL db.
> Downsides: Probably more verbose.  Requires ruby or python knowledge ("Everyone knows
some sql").  Big? (jruby lib is 24M).
> I was going to write security as downside but HQL suffers this at the moment too -- though
it has been possible to sort the updates from the selects in the UI to prevent modification
of the db from the UI, something that would be hard to do in a jruby/jython parser.
> What do others think?

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

View raw message