Mailing-List: contact hbase-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: hbase-dev@hadoop.apache.org
Message-ID: <973395559.1241138970636.JavaMail.jira@brutus>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 17:49:30 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Erik Holstad (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: hbase-dev@hadoop.apache.org
Subject: [jira] Commented: (HBASE-880) Improve the current client API by
 creating new container classes
In-Reply-To: <1824320241.1221058724990.JavaMail.jira@brutus>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-880?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12704865#action_12704865 ] 

Erik Holstad commented on HBASE-880:
------------------------------------

@Stack
I have a question about the RESULT format, why is is that you want for it to implement List<KeyValue>?
The way I see it it would be easier to just pass it the KeyValue[] that we get from the server and put that
into the Constructor for RESULTS, like Result result = new Result(KeyValue[] kv).
What to you think about that? 

> Improve the current client API by creating new container classes
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-880
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-880
>             Project: Hadoop HBase
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: client
>            Reporter: Jean-Daniel Cryans
>             Fix For: 0.20.0
>
>         Attachments: 880.patch, 880proposal4plus-v2.patch, 880proposal4plus.patch, 880proposal5-v2.patch, 880proposal5-v2.png, 880proposal5.patch, 880proposal5.png, hbase-880-patch.jpg, hbase-880-proposal4.patch, HBASE-880-proposal6-v2.txt, HBASE-880-proposal6-v3.txt, HBASE-880-proposal6-v4.txt, hbase-880-v1.patch, hbase-880-v2.patch, HBASE-880_Design_Doc_v5.pdf, hbase_client_classes.png, NewCilentAPIProposoal4.gif, proposal2.jpg, proposed.jpg
>
>   Original Estimate: 240h
>  Remaining Estimate: 240h
>
> The current API does not scale very well. For each new feature, we have to add many methods to take care of all the overloads. Also, the need to batch row operations (gets, inserts, deletes) implies that we have to manage some "entities" like we are able to do with BatchUpdate but not with the other operations. The RowLock should be an attribute of such an entity.
> The scope of this jira is only to replace current API with another feature-compatible one, other methods will be added in other issues.

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