whirr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Patrick Hunt <ph...@cloudera.com>
Subject Re: Convetion for Role names
Date Fri, 07 Jan 2011 17:21:12 GMT
+1 on Tom's suggestion. Having a standard like the one used for hbase
is good. Keep the short form around (deprecated).


On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 9:07 AM, Tom White <tom.e.white@gmail.com> wrote:
> The shorter names (nn, zk, etc) predate Whirr to when the roles were a
> part of the group name and had to be kept short to conform to various
> length restrictions. We do things differently now that we have
> multi-cloud support, so keeping them short is less important, and
> indeed with a global namespace (since service name is optional) there
> is even more reason to make them distinctive and unique. So I would
> suggest the longer, hyphenated form that we adopted for HBase, like
> hbase-regionserver; so the pattern is <service-name>-<daemon>.
> There's not much harm in keeping the shorter forms around, but we
> could introduce aliases like hadoop-namenode, zookeeper, etc and
> deprecate the short ones.
> Does that sound reasonable?
> Cheers,
> Tom
> On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 2:16 AM, Andrei Savu <savu.andrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Whirr support the following instance roles: dn, jt, nn, tt, zk,
>> hbase-avroserver, hbase-master, hbase-regionserver, hbase-restserver,
>> hbase-thriftserver and as you can see the naming is inconsistent and
>> sometimes it's hard to guess the meaning.
>> Should we have a convention for role names? I believe this is important now
>> that service-name is optional.
>> -- Andrei Savu

View raw message