hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From lars hofhansl <la...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Managed Connections and HBase 1.0
Date Thu, 23 Oct 2014 15:38:58 GMT
What prompted this was when I looked first at the client from the viewpoint of long running
clients in AppServers.
I realized that the current abstraction is weird: You create HTable and trigger a pretty elaborate
process of managing HConnections on demand. Initially an HConnection could not survive a bounce
of the cluster, leaving the AppServers with the client useless until restarted.
To work around issues with this HConnection management the HTablePool monster was created.
A better and easier abstraction is to connect to your cluster (i.e. create an HConnection)
and then use this established connection to get HTable objects (HTables are then cheap and
predictable as they are only functioning as a convenient proxy for a table, but do not manage
any resources).
-- Lars

      From: Solomon Duskis <sduskis@gmail.com>
 To: dev@hbase.apache.org 
 Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2014 7:28 AM
 Subject: Re: Managed Connections and HBase 1.0
Yeah, I'm going to continue to tackle this from the perspective of HBase
code, and will definitely proceed with caution.  This is a huge change, and
I'll do my best to

I would think that this changes functionality from the user's perspective.
What will users need to know and do regarding this change once they migrate
to 1.0?

What prompted this change?

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 11:11 PM, Nick Dimiduk <ndimiduk@gmail.com> wrote:

> Yes, the concept of connection caching, aka, managed connections are going
> away. See also HBASE-9117. I tried rebasing that monster patch a couple
> weeks back and decided it wasn't worth it. If you're interested in tackling
> this problem, I recommend biting off smaller chunks.
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 6:00 PM, Solomon Duskis <sduskis@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I have a question about managed vs. unmanaged connections in HBase 1.0.
> > The new ConnectionFactory implementation and the Connection interface
> don't
> > seem to include the concept of managed connections for tables.  Are
> HTable
> > managed connections going to be deprecated?
> >
> > -Solomon Duskis
> >

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message