Thanks for stepping up Jarcec. If we do not see other ideas offered to
address this, we can timeout after a couple of days and file the necessary
JIRA to do follow-up work on this.

Thanks,
Arvind

On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:09 AM, Jarek Jarcec Cecho <[email protected]>wrote:

> +1.
>
> I would like to help if needed.
>
> Jarcec
>
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 09:54:59AM -0800, Arvind Prabhakar wrote:
> > So far we have the following sinks in Flume (ng):
> >
> > - AvroSink
> > - HDFSEventSink
> > - IRCSink
> > - LoggerSink
> > - NullSink
> > - RollingFileSink
> >
> > All of these sinks are of type PollableSink - where the contract is that
> an
> > active runner polls the sink to pick the next event based on a set
> policy.
> > This runner is great since it offers us the ability to decouple thread
> > lifecycle details from the sink implementation. It also offers the
> ability
> > to implement failover/load-balancing and other complex sink routing
> > policies as necessary. Flume-865 is taking this approach.
> >
> > Since all Sinks are PollableSink types, I am suggesting that we collapse
> > the PollableSink into the Sink interface itself (promote process() into
> > Sink). This will ensure that our infrastructure is built to deal with
> such
> > sink types only and therefore will be easier to implement and support.
> >
> > If you feel this is not a valid assumption, please chime in to discuss
> your
> > viewpoint.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Arvind
>

Reply via email to