incubator-hama-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Edward J. Yoon" <edwardy...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Messaging Interface
Date Fri, 03 Feb 2012 01:14:10 GMT
I think, we may want to change like <? extends Writable, ? extends Writable>.

On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 9:45 AM, Edward J. Yoon <edwardyoon@apache.org> wrote:
> I prefer the Writable.
>
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 8:49 PM, Thomas Jungblut
> <thomas.jungblut@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I refactored the messaging in 0.3.0 and changed this from an inteface to an
>> abstract base class.
>> Currently it is fine, but I feel that the user is too restricted in using
>> messages.
>> You have this strict structure of tag and data. I think we should widen the
>> messages to just Messagable .
>> If we want to have the freedom to add additional things, we should extend
>> Messagable from Writable and use this for it.
>>
>> So send may look like this:
>>
>> public final void send(String peerName, Messagable msg)
>>
>>
>> and getCurrentMessage:
>>
>>  public final Messagable getCurrentMessage()
>>
>>
>> However, I am not really happy that we return Messagable (requires casting
>> and stuff).
>> For the usecases of specific tagging we can add the getTag() method to the
>> Messagable interface.
>> What type should this be then? I mean, String would be quite a large
>> overhead. Integer might not be useful.
>>
>> Or should we widen this to Writable instead? So you can send things you've
>> read from sequencefiles directly to other tasks.
>>
>> What do you think? I am still not aware of how it should look like. Or are
>> you satisfied with the current messaging?
>>
>> --
>> Thomas Jungblut
>> Berlin <thomas.jungblut@gmail.com>
>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
> @eddieyoon



-- 
Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
@eddieyoon

Mime
View raw message