hbase-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jurriaan Mous <jurm...@jurmo.us>
Subject Async RpcClient
Date Wed, 17 Dec 2014 17:32:26 GMT

I have been working on a Netty 4 based async HBase client to fit better within the event driven
server I have been developing. - https://github.com/jurmous/async-hbase-client/tree/HBase-0.99

Recently I have been submitting some patches to make it easier to switch out the RpcClient
of HBase. This to enable HBase to use the client itself in all communication. I wanted to
do this to use the tests on HBase to check if the client was solid on all edge cases but also
to enable HBase to possibly migrate to an async client. These were committed on master and
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-12597 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-12597>
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-12684 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-12684>

Now I am at the next step where I want to contribute back the AsyncRpcClient itself. 

I have opened this issue to add AsyncRpcClient:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-12684 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-12684>
In the current patch the new async client is the default.

3 questions:

Can anyone with a proper Kerberos setup test if the async client works? SASL Digest auth works
but I haven’t tested Kerberos yet. 

Can anyone with know-how on benchmarking test what the performance of this client is compared
to the current client? The performance should of course be great in all relevant metrics will
it ever be the main client. 

What will we do with the old RpcClient if the async RpcClient is introduced? It would be great
to remove it so hbase can internally base anything async (like AsyncProcess) on the async
RPC client and this would not be possible with an also supported sync RPC client. A possible
route is to make AsyncRpcClient an option on 1.x and a default on 2.0 branch where we remove
the old client. 

When the new AsyncRpcClient will be the default it is possible to introduce callback variants
of the Table, Scanner and Admin methods and possibly deprecate batch and other AsyncProcess
based calls to replace it with a more flexible batch callback implementation. 


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