tajo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From CharSyam <chars...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSSION] Portable remote client APIs
Date Tue, 17 Mar 2015 05:59:38 GMT
Yes :) But I think we need good docs for REST api also for client
developers.

2015-03-17 14:32 GMT+09:00 Hyunsik Choi <hyunsik@apache.org>:

> According to the vote results, let's focus on REST for remote API.
>
> Best regards,
> Hyunsik
>
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 11:36 PM, Jaehwa Jung <blrunner@apache.org> wrote:
> > This discussion started to avoid duplicated efforts.
> > IMPOV, if we choice both of REST and Thrift, it may be complex to
> maintain
> > Tajo codes.
> >
> > 2015-03-13 15:28 GMT+09:00 정유선(JUNG YOUSUN) <jerryjung@sk.com>:
> >
> >> Yep! I just think both can support multiple language client.
> >> As you mentioned, it is not critical issues about performance in Thrift.
> >> Anyway, I think it's a good discussion about the remote interface on
> Tajo.
> >> :)
> >>
> >> Sincerely,
> >> Yousun Jeong
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Hyunsik Choi [mailto:hyunsik@apache.org]
> >> Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 2:59 PM
> >> To: dev@tajo.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION] Portable remote client APIs
> >>
> >> Hi Jerry,
> >>
> >> How much faster and lightweight than REST? Luckily, Thrift may be faster
> >> 1~2 msec than REST per call.
> >>
> >> But, note that Tajo is an analytical system. The target response times
> of
> >> Tajo are usually from few seconds to hours. So, the speed which come
> from
> >> wired protocol is much trivial to the purpose of our client APIs.
> >>
> >> The link you introduce is about Hbase. As you know, Hbase is OLTP-like
> >> system. It processes thousands of transactions per seconds. So, the
> speed
> >> and lightweight are important to them. But, Tajo is not.
> >>
> >> As I mentioned, REST API is very portable and has no dependencies in
> many
> >> languages. I think that these are the most important factors of our
> client
> >> APIs.
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >> Hyunsik
> >>
> >> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 9:33 PM, 정유선 <jerryjung@sk.com> wrote:
> >> > I suggest another option.
> >> > What do you think about two options for remote interface?
> >> > Thrift is the faster and more lightweight than REST.
> >> > Please refer this article.
> >> > -
> >> >
> http://blog.cloudera.com/blog/2013/03/how-to-use-the-apache-hbase-rest
> >> > -interface-part-1/ It describes various ways to access and interact
> >> > with HBase.
> >> > Both of them, giving developers a wide choice of languages and
> programs
> >> to use.
> >> >
> >> > Best regards,
> >> > Yousun Jeong.
> >> >
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: Hyunsik Choi [mailto:hyunsik@apache.org]
> >> > Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 8:34 AM
> >> > To: dev@tajo.apache.org
> >> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION] Portable remote client APIs
> >> >
> >> > We seem to get a consent to use REST API. I'll wait for one more day,
> >> and then we can decide this issue.
> >> >
> >> > Best regards,
> >> > Hyunsik
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 7:56 AM, Hyoungjun Kim <babokim@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >> Hi all,
> >> >>
> >> >> I give +1 to REST API.
> >> >> I think REST is more common.
> >> >>
> >> >> Warm regards,
> >> >> Hyoungjun
> >> >> 2015. 3. 12. 오후 10:41에 "Jihun Kang" <ykrips@gmail.com>님이
작성:
> >> >>
> >> >>> Hello All,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I would give +1 to REST API Implementation. Even Protobuf and Thrift
> >> >>> give flexibility and extensibility to programmers, but entry
> >> >>> barriers for these frameworks are extremely high. Also, if we want
> >> >>> to make another client implementation for other programming
> >> >>> languages, we need to figure out that these framework have code
> >> generator feature for that programming language.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> 2015-03-12 20:18 GMT+09:00 Jaehwa Jung <blrunner@apache.org>:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> > Hi guys
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > +1 for Hyunsik's suggestion.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > REST API may be more efficient for code maintenance and various
> >> >>> > clients implementation.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > Cheers
> >> >>> > Jaehwa
> >> >>> >  +1 RESTful API for code maintenance
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > -Jinho
> >> >>> > Best regards
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > 2015-03-12 17:56 GMT+09:00 CharSyam <charsyam@gmail.com>:
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > > +1
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> > > I also agree with hyunsik's suggesttion.
> >> >>> > > I think it is better to make language binding to use
Rest API.
> >> >>> > > It will be more efficient and less effort :)
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> > > 2015-03-12 17:38 GMT+09:00 Jihoon Son <jihoonson@apache.org>:
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> > > > +1 for Hyunsik's suggestion.
> >> >>> > > > I totally agree with you.
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> > > > Warm regards,
> >> >>> > > > Jihoon
> >> >>> > > > 2015년 3월 12일 (목) 오후 5:35, Hyunsik Choi
<hyunsik@apache.org>님이
> >> 작성:
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> > > > > Here is my suggestion.
> >> >>> > > > >
> >> >>> > > > > I prefer REST API. I think that it would be
better than
> >> >>> > > > > other due
> >> >>> to
> >> >>> > > > > the following reasons:
> >> >>> > > > >
> >> >>> > > > >  * No dependency - most of script languages
do not need any
> >> >>> > dependency
> >> >>> > > > > for this approach. Also, C and C++ just needs
json library
> >> >>> > > > > for this approach. Please look at JSON for
Modern C++
> >> >>> > > > > (https://github.com/nlohmann/json). It just
requires to
> >> >>> > > > > include
> >> >>> one
> >> >>> > > > > header and one source file. As a result, there
is no
> >> >>> > > > > dependency problem.
> >> >>> > > > >
> >> >>> > > > >  * Portability - most of script languages basically
support
> >> >>> > > > > REST
> >> >>> and
> >> >>> > > > > JSON. They don't need client implementation.
They can just
> >> >>> > > > > use REST and JSON features in order to access
Tajo. If
> >> >>> > > > > necessary, we can
> >> >>> make
> >> >>> > > > > easily some helper libraries for other languages.
> >> >>> > > > >
> >> >>> > > > >  * Secure - It is easy to provide the secure
channel and
> >> >>> > > > > authentication method too. Basically, many
HTTP API provides
> >> >>> > > > > HTTP
> >> >>> > over
> >> >>> > > > > SSL.
> >> >>> > > > >
> >> >>> > > > > Jihoon Kang already started REST API work.
If others start
> >> >>> > > > > to
> >> >>> develop
> >> >>> > > > > clients for other languages like C/C++ client
over REST API
> >> >>> > > > > after
> >> >>> his
> >> >>> > > > > work, it would be best for us.
> >> >>> > > > >
> >> >>> > > > > Best regards,
> >> >>> > > > > Hyunsik
> >> >>> > > > >
> >> >>> > > > > On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 1:32 AM, Hyunsik Choi
> >> >>> > > > > <hyunsik@apache.org>
> >> >>> > > > wrote:
> >> >>> > > > > > Hi folks,
> >> >>> > > > > >
> >> >>> > > > > > Recently, there are three trials to add
new remote client
> >> APIs.
> >> >>> > > > > >
> >> >>> > > > > > * C/C++ Client over Thrift - https://issues.apache.org/
> >> >>> > > > > jira/browse/TAJO-1264
> >> >>> > > > > > * Add REST Client API -
> >> >>> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAJO-1331
> >> >>> > > > > > * Tajo Python Native Client - https://issues.apache.org/
> >> >>> > > > > jira/browse/TAJO-1367
> >> >>> > > > > >
> >> >>> > > > > > In some aspect, I'm very happy to discuss
such an issue. I
> >> >>> haven't
> >> >>> > > > > > expected that we are discuss and vote
for duplicated
> efforts.
> >> >>> > > > > >
> >> >>> > > > > > BTW, it would be great if we do not spend
our resource on
> >> >>> > duplicated
> >> >>> > > > > works.
> >> >>> > > > > >
> >> >>> > > > > > In order to rearrange this duplicated
works, we need some
> >> >>> > discussion
> >> >>> > > > > > about their pros and cons. I hope that
we consent our
> >> >>> > > > > > direction
> >> >>> > after
> >> >>> > > > > > this discussion. Otherwise, we can call
for a vote for the
> >> >>> > approach.
> >> >>> > > > > >
> >> >>> > > > > > Best regards,
> >> >>> > > > > > Hyunsik
> >> >>> > > > >
> >> >>> > > >
> >> >>> > >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>>
> >>
>

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