Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-hbase-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: (qmail 24016 invoked from network); 29 Jun 2009 16:07:44 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 29 Jun 2009 16:07:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 65570 invoked by uid 500); 29 Jun 2009 16:07:54 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-hbase-dev-archive@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 65526 invoked by uid 500); 29 Jun 2009 16:07:54 -0000 Mailing-List: contact hbase-dev-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: hbase-dev@hadoop.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list hbase-dev@hadoop.apache.org Delivered-To: moderator for hbase-dev@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 80178 invoked by uid 99); 29 Jun 2009 15:10:56 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.0 required=10.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 08:09:57 -0700 From: George Porter Subject: Re: who's doing what for 0.21? In-reply-to: <78568af10906240035v4b9c6d7dwad5e75ec441b620f@mail.gmail.com> Sender: George.Porter@Sun.COM To: avro-dev@hadoop.apache.org Cc: hbase-dev@hadoop.apache.org Message-id: <58C11BA6-8F5F-4921-9673-9F7B31684BD4@Sun.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.935.3) References: <475316.13696.qm@web65509.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <227781.87293.qm@web65515.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> <4A4057E2.3000708@cloudera.com> <78568af10906222136mf9da956xcdb19b617cb9bd96@mail.gmail.com> <78568af10906240035v4b9c6d7dwad5e75ec441b620f@mail.gmail.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org I'd be happy to look into bottom up profiling with tracer tags (path- based metadata field) supported with avro. I implemented similar tracing with Thrift by including an optional parameter into each RPC by default which passed along metadata. If the receiver didn't understand it, it would just ignore that parameter, and if the client didn't support it, then the receiver would just use a default value of null. It seems like a similar approach could be taken with Avro, and I'll check that out this week. Thanks, George On Jun 24, 2009, at 12:35 AM, Ryan Rawson wrote: > Here are some thoughts: > > - Performance is important. > - Unified protocol would help the use of tracer tags, which could give > us top to bottom profiling. > - Would like to do rolling restart of HBase, even under relatively > major upgrades. > - PHP (even pure php) bindings. > > I'll poke at the code, what is the current state? >