hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tim Sell <trs...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: thrift vs thrift2
Date Fri, 07 Dec 2012 23:13:46 GMT
Hey,

I don't think my opinion should be taken too seriously on this as I
don't have any need or access to a HBase cluster anymore.

But.. I think it would be a mistake to deprecate or remove thrift2 and
keep the original. It's just bad design to have completely different
looking thrift api to the java and rest apis. That said the thrift2
api is definitely incomplete compared to the thrift1 API as it
intentionally didn't implement the admin methods and people would be
annoyed if thrift1 suddenly disappeared.
I think a good design would be one in which the java/rest and thrift
apis were simply implementing the same interface.
A better one might be that the thrift and rest packages are stand
alone java projects that build separately and simply depend on HBase,
but that would be a hassle for deployment.

The thing is, if I was using hbase today, I wouldn't use the hbase
thrift or thrift2 api, I'd implement my own thrift api (in java) that
was domain specific so that the application didn't know it was talking
to hbase.

~Tim




On 7 December 2012 22:38, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com> wrote:
> Tim:
> Do you have comment for the proposal below ?
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Jimmy Xiang <jxiang@cloudera.com>
> Date: Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 2:20 PM
> Subject: Re: thrift vs thrift2
> To: dev@hbase.apache.org
>
>
> Since thrift has many users while thrift2 doesn't, does it make more
> sense to deprecate and remove thrift2 instead?
> People are more used to the existing thrift interface.  Although it is
> different from the java API, it seems to not have
> any performance hit.
>
> Thanks,
> Jimmy
>
> On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 2:01 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Logged https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-7302 for this.
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 1:56 PM, Luke Lu <llu@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> The embeded HRegionThriftServer should be ported to thrift2 before we
>>> deprecate thrift1. FB's (and potentially others) c++ client requires
>>> HRegionThriftServer.
>>>
>>> __Luke
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 7:21 PM, Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > +1 for deprecation. Will bring any users out of the woodwork who might
>>> not
>>> > see this discussion at least.
>>> >
>>> > On Friday, December 7, 2012, Jesse Yates wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > According to the thrift2 docs, it is the 'right' way to access HBase
>>> > > -
>>> > the
>>> > > thrift package is based on an older HBase interface that no longer
>>> > exists.
>>> > > Seems like a reasonable case for deprecation in the next release and
>>> > > dropping it all together after.
>>> > > -------------------
>>> > > Jesse Yates
>>> > > @jesse_yates
>>> > > jyates.github.com
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 4:48 PM, Stack
>>> > > <stack@duboce.net<javascript:;>>
>>> > > wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > > On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 3:24 PM, Jimmy Xiang <jxiang@cloudera.com
>>> > <javascript:;>>
>>> > > wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > > Since 0.96 is a singularity, is it a time to deprecate thrift
>>> > finally?
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > Or we can use thrift2 by default, and keep thrift around
more?
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > What's the pros and cons to switch to thrift2?
>>> > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Interesting notion.  Could move thrift2 to thrift altogether.
>>> > > > Would
>>> > need
>>> > > > to make sure thrift2 has all from thrift1.
>>> > > > St.Ack
>>> > > >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Best regards,
>>> >
>>> >    - Andy
>>> >
>>> > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet
>>> > Hein
>>> > (via Tom White)
>>> >
>>>
>

Mime
View raw message