hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sean Busbey <bus...@cloudera.com>
Subject Re: [NOTICE] Merge of shaded protobuf 3.1.0 (WAS => [DISCUSS] Shade protobuf so we can move to a newer version)
Date Sat, 01 Oct 2016 03:55:27 GMT
have we experimentally confirmed that wire compatibility is
maintained? I saw one mention of expecting wire compatibility to be
fine, but nothing with someone using e.g. the clusterdock work or
something to mix servers / clients or do replication.

On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 6:30 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
> I intend to do a mass commit late this weekend that moves us on to a shaded
> protobuf-3.1.0, either Sunday night or Monday morning.
>
> If objection, please speak up or if need more time for
> consideration/review, just shout.
>
> I want to merge the branch HBASE-16264 into master (it is running here up
> on jenkins https://builds.apache.org/view/H-L/view/HBase/job/HBASE-16264/).
> The branch at HBASE-16264 has three significant bodies-of-work that
> unfortunately are tangled and can only go in of a piece.
>
>  * HBASE-16264 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-16264> The
> shading of our protobuf usage so we can upgrade and/or run with a patched
> protobuf WITHOUT breaking REST, Spark, and in particular, Coprocessor
> Endpoints.
>  * HBASE-16567 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-16567> A move
> up on to (shaded) protobuf-3.1.0
>  * HBASE-16741 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-16741> An
> amendment of our generate protobufs step to include shading and a bundling
> of protobuf src (with a means of calling a patch srcs hook)
>
> Together we're talking about 40MB of change mostly made of the movement of
> generated files or the application of a pattern that alters where we get
> imports from. When done, you should notice no difference and should be able
> to go about your business as per usual. Upside is that we will be able to
> avoid coming onheap doing protobuf marshalling/unmarshalling as protobuf
> 2.5.0 requires. Downside is that we repeat a good portion of our internal
> protos, once non-shaded so Coprocessor Endpoints can keep working and then
> again as shaded for internal use.
>
> I provide some more overview below on the changes. See the shading doc
> here:
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1H4NgLXQ9Y9KejwobddCqaVMEDCGbyDcXtdF5iAfDIEk/edit#
> for more detail (Patches are up on review board -- except the latest
> HBASE-16264 which is too big for JIRA and RB). I am currently working on a
> devs chapter for the book on protobuf going forward that will go in as part
> of this patch.
>
> Thanks,
> St.Ack
>
> Items of note:
>
>  * Two new modules; one named hbase-protocol-shaded that is used by hbase
> core. It has in it a shaded (and later patched) protobuf. The other new
> module is hbase-endpoint which goes after hbase-server and has those
> bundled endpoints that I was able to break out of core (there are a few
> that are hopelessly entangled that need to be undone as CPEPs but
> fortunately belong in core: Auth, Access, MultiRow).
>  * I've tested running a branch-1 CPEP against a master with these patches
> in place and stuff like ACL (A CPEP) run from the branch-1 shell work
> against the branch-2 server.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 5:20 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
>
>> This project goes on. I updated HBASE-1563 "Shade protobuf" with some doc
>> on a final approach. We need to be able to refer to both shaded and
>> non-shaded protobuf so we can support sending HDFS old-school pb Messages
>> but also so Coprocessor Endpoints keep working though internally protobufs
>> have been relocated. Funny you should ask, but yes, there are some
>> downsides (as predicted by contributors on the JIRA). I'd be interested to
>> hear if they are too burdensome. In particular, your IDE experience gets a
>> little convoluted as you will need to add to your build path, a jar with
>> the relocated pbs. A pain.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> St.Ack
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 6:09 AM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 9:26 PM, Sean Busbey <busbey@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 6:17 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On an initial pass, the only difficult part seems to be interaction
>>>> with
>>>> > HDFS in asyncwal (might just pull in the HDFS messages).
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> I have some idea how we can make this work either by pushing asyncwal
>>>> upstream to HDFS or through some maven tricks, depending on how much
>>>> time we have.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Maven tricks? Tell us more. Here or drop a note up in the issue.
>>> Thanks Sean,
>>> St.Ack
>>>
>>
>>



-- 
busbey

Mime
View raw message