hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Purtell <andrew.purt...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Increase stability on o.a.h.h.Tag?
Date Fri, 22 Sep 2017 16:11:38 GMT
Tags are server side internal metadata. Some carry sensitive information like labels. I guess
this could appear odd if not around for discussion when they were introduced. So what documentation
can be improved to lessen the surprise? Javadoc? Online book? A JIRA with suggestions welcome.



> On Sep 22, 2017, at 9:07 AM, Josh Elser <elserj@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> I can appreciate how we've gotten to this point, it just struck me extremely odd that
the contents of a Tag weren't expected to be accessed by users. "Arbitrary metadata that rides
along with a cell, you just can't see that metadata" ;)
> 
> I totally understand not wanting to let another thing come into 2.0. Like MikeD said,
let's hope for a faster 3.0 and we can slate this for that time.
> 
> Thanks for entertaining the discussion. We'll just deal with the "downstream pain" for
2.0.
> 
>> On 9/22/17 1:32 AM, ramkrishna vasudevan wrote:
>> CellUtil  similar type of methods. Coming to Tags yes there are not much
>> cases where clients can directly set Tags. And I think we don't expose any
>> APIs which allow you to use mutations with Tags. So probably moving to
>> LimitedPrivate is better and mark with Evolving if there are some users
>> depending on the internals of Tags and its impl. But this will be a One of
>> case.
>> And also since Tags are internal ideally the CellUtil#getTAgs() should have
>> been in another Util method that is exposed with LimitedPrivate and also
>> Tags if tags should be made LimitedPRivate. So this may help in not having
>> a PRivate interface like Tag in a public CellUtil class.
>> 3.0 is fine but need some clean up in 2.0? Indicating what could happen
>> going forward from 2.0?
>> Regards
>> Ram
>>> On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 2:59 AM, Sean Busbey <busbey@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Yeah. I mean, I think we should improve  the situation. Just think
>>> it's too much to bite off at this stage of 2.0, we can aim for 3.0 and
>>> start working in some tooling to help us.
>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 3:35 PM, Josh Elser <elserj@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> That really makes me groan (we have downstream users depending on code
>>> we've
>>>> explicitly said "don't use"), but if that's what it is given the current
>>>> state, so be it. My complaining won't fix it.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On 9/21/17 4:25 PM, Sean Busbey wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> We have lots of examples of including non-Public stuff in Public APIs.
>>>>> we have docs that advise folks to be wary on relying on them beyond
>>>>> opaque symbols.
>>>>> 
>>>>> ref: http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#hbase.client.api.surface
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Josh Elser <elserj@apache.org>
wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I was going to suggest LimitedPrivate in my original, but this doesn't
>>>>>> make
>>>>>> sense as we're exposing Public API via CellUtil.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> It seems odd to me that we wouldn't treat the cell tags as a supported
>>>>>> API
>>>>>> call. However, I'm happy to remain "confused" if the rest of folks
>>> don't
>>>>>> consider tags to be intended for users :)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 9/21/17 3:15 PM, Ted Yu wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Can we mark Tag LimitedPrivate ?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> We know how ATS uses Tags so it should be straight forward to
keep
>>> their
>>>>>>> usage intact.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 12:03 PM, Josh Elser <elserj@apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Hiya,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> (Background, I'm starting what is likely to be an onerous
task of
>>>>>>>> looking
>>>>>>>> through downstream components and seeing what is broken with
the
>>> latest
>>>>>>>> hbase-2.0.0*)
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Looking at YARN's use of HBase for the Application TimelineServer,
I
>>>>>>>> see
>>>>>>>> that they're relying on the Tag interface.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Presently, Tag is marked as Private, yet we expose it via
the Public
>>>>>>>> CellUtil.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> My gut reaction is that we should bump Tag up Public since
the intent
>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>> for downstream users to, ya know, use those Tags. Any objections?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> If we don't want to expose Tag, we should make a pass over
the Public
>>>>>>>> methods and mark them as Private (so not as to provide a
Public
>>> method
>>>>>>>> with
>>>>>>>> Private objects). CellUtil#getTag(Cell, byte) would be one
such
>>>>>>>> example.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> - Josh
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 

Mime
View raw message