hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael Segel <michael_se...@hotmail.com>
Subject Re: On coprocessor API evolution
Date Wed, 21 May 2014 12:16:11 GMT
And they accuse me of raising a straw man. ;-) 
Todd, really? A parent/child relationship can be secured… how depends on how you communicate.

You could always encrypt the data… in the messaging… ;-) 

On May 19, 2014, at 11:37 PM, Todd Lipcon <todd@cloudera.com> wrote:

> On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 12:05 PM, Vladimir Rodionov
> <vladrodionov@gmail.com>wrote:
>> Michael S.
>>>> To the best of my knowledge,  MapR’s M7 doesn’t have coprocessors. I’ll
>> wager that when they do, it will work and not have these issues. I believe
>> that they are writing their stuff in C/C++, if so, then they’d have an
>> advantage of using shared memory.  Apache would have write C/C++ code and
>> wrap it in JNI… which you may not want to do…<<
>> MapR M7 does not support coprocessors and custom Filters as well. I
>> consider this to be a serious limitation of the product.
>> Shared memory communication can be done in Java w/o single line of C/C++
>> code, Michael by means of memory-mapped files.
>> -Vladimir
> And even in native code, shared memory for communication between untrusted
> peers can be pretty tricky to do securely (read
> http://lwn.net/Articles/593918/ for details)
> -Todd
> -- 
> Todd Lipcon
> Software Engineer, Cloudera

View raw message