haha you're not thick; you're noticing a bit of a hack that should probably be corrected. The use of parsers here is entirely to opportunistically take advantage of the fact taht the parsers have as direct dependencies all of the stellar functions in Metron. This was done prior to us being able to side-load stellar functions (and it was still a bit of a hack, tbh). Moving forward, I'd love to see the stellar functions extracted from Metron and installed into HDFS and referenced that way, rather than bundled and opportunistically referred to like in here.
On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 10:03 AM, Otto Fowler <[email protected]> wrote: > OK, not to be thick, I just don’t see where any class from metron-parsers > gets called or instantiated. > ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ > > > On April 24, 2017 at 09:55:38, Casey Stella ([email protected]) wrote: > > All of the current stellar functions are depended on either directly or > indirectly by the parser. > > On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Otto Fowler <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> too bad there isn’t a pr out for that kind of stuff ;) >> >> There are no stellar functions in parsers, except what is brought in from >> common, why doesn’t this just call common? >> You don’t need parsers jar for any of this do you? >> >> >> On April 24, 2017 at 09:22:06, Casey Stella ([email protected]) wrote: >> >> Because stellar statements are validated prior to pushing, we needed the >> functions on the classpath. I don't particularly like it as it's a >> kludge. I'd really prefer to separate the non-core stellar functions from >> the Metron core and have them deployed to HDFS, but we haven't gotten >> there >> quite yet. :) >> >> Casey >> >> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 7:15 AM, Otto Fowler <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > So, this script is in common, but: >> > >> > export JAR=metron-parsers-$METRON_VERSION-uber.jar >> > >> > Is the jar it executes. The class it references is : >> > >> > >> > export CLASSNAME=“org.apache.metron.common.cli.ConfigurationManager" >> > >> > So, why is it calling the parsers jar? >> > >> >> >
