[jira] [Commented] (HBASE-5905) Protobuf interface for Admin: split between the internal and the external/customer interface
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5905?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13270818#comment-13270818
]
stack commented on HBASE-5905:
--
If we were to make an InternalClusterProtocol, we could:
1. Subclass the user-facing open and close messages (thats all that would need
it as I see it).
2. We could do the internal version of open and close as extensions
(https://developers.google.com/protocol-buffers/docs/proto#extensions) naming
the extensions 'Internal' or something or we could do nested extensions naming
the nested extention ForInternalUse?
I'm thinking that since there are only open and close effected, and since its
only the one field in open and only two in close region, its not enough to
justify doing the above extra work? How about we doc the .proto file 'for
internal use' only and be done with it?
Protobuf interface for Admin: split between the internal and the
external/customer interface
Key: HBASE-5905
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5905
Project: HBase
Issue Type: Improvement
Components: client, master, regionserver
Affects Versions: 0.96.0
Reporter: nkeywal
After a short discussion with Stack, I create a jira.
--
I'am a little bit confused by the protobuf interface for closeRegion.
We have two types of closeRegion today:
1) the external ones; available in client.HBaseAdmin. They take the server
and the region identifier as a parameter and nothing else.
2) The internal ones, called for example by the master. They have more
parameters (like versionOfClosingNode or transitionInZK).
When I look at protobuf.ProtobufUtil, I see:
public static void closeRegion(final AdminProtocol admin,
final byte[] regionName, final boolean transitionInZK) throws
IOException {
CloseRegionRequest closeRegionRequest =
RequestConverter.buildCloseRegionRequest(regionName, transitionInZK);
try {
admin.closeRegion(null, closeRegionRequest);
} catch (ServiceException se) {
throw getRemoteException(se);
}
}
In other words, it seems that we merged the two interfaces into a single one.
Is that the intend?
I checked, the internal fields in closeRegionRequest are all optional (that's
good). Still, it means that the end user could use them or at least would
need to distinguish between the optional for functional reasons and the
optional - do not use.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] [Commented] (HBASE-5905) Protobuf interface for Admin: split between the internal and the external/customer interface
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5905?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13266839#comment-13266839
]
nkeywal commented on HBASE-5905:
This would make sense if we think that customers should/will use the protobuf
interface.
Protobuf interface for Admin: split between the internal and the
external/customer interface
Key: HBASE-5905
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5905
Project: HBase
Issue Type: Improvement
Components: client, master, regionserver
Affects Versions: 0.96.0
Reporter: nkeywal
After a short discussion with Stack, I create a jira.
--
I'am a little bit confused by the protobuf interface for closeRegion.
We have two types of closeRegion today:
1) the external ones; available in client.HBaseAdmin. They take the server
and the region identifier as a parameter and nothing else.
2) The internal ones, called for example by the master. They have more
parameters (like versionOfClosingNode or transitionInZK).
When I look at protobuf.ProtobufUtil, I see:
public static void closeRegion(final AdminProtocol admin,
final byte[] regionName, final boolean transitionInZK) throws
IOException {
CloseRegionRequest closeRegionRequest =
RequestConverter.buildCloseRegionRequest(regionName, transitionInZK);
try {
admin.closeRegion(null, closeRegionRequest);
} catch (ServiceException se) {
throw getRemoteException(se);
}
}
In other words, it seems that we merged the two interfaces into a single one.
Is that the intend?
I checked, the internal fields in closeRegionRequest are all optional (that's
good). Still, it means that the end user could use them or at least would
need to distinguish between the optional for functional reasons and the
optional - do not use.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] [Commented] (HBASE-5905) Protobuf interface for Admin: split between the internal and the external/customer interface
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5905?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13265710#comment-13265710
]
nkeywal commented on HBASE-5905:
I don't think so. But we could add a specific comment?
Protobuf interface for Admin: split between the internal and the
external/customer interface
Key: HBASE-5905
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5905
Project: HBase
Issue Type: Improvement
Components: client, master, regionserver
Affects Versions: 0.96.0
Reporter: nkeywal
After a short discussion with Stack, I create a jira.
--
I'am a little bit confused by the protobuf interface for closeRegion.
We have two types of closeRegion today:
1) the external ones; available in client.HBaseAdmin. They take the server
and the region identifier as a parameter and nothing else.
2) The internal ones, called for example by the master. They have more
parameters (like versionOfClosingNode or transitionInZK).
When I look at protobuf.ProtobufUtil, I see:
public static void closeRegion(final AdminProtocol admin,
final byte[] regionName, final boolean transitionInZK) throws
IOException {
CloseRegionRequest closeRegionRequest =
RequestConverter.buildCloseRegionRequest(regionName, transitionInZK);
try {
admin.closeRegion(null, closeRegionRequest);
} catch (ServiceException se) {
throw getRemoteException(se);
}
}
In other words, it seems that we merged the two interfaces into a single one.
Is that the intend?
I checked, the internal fields in closeRegionRequest are all optional (that's
good). Still, it means that the end user could use them or at least would
need to distinguish between the optional for functional reasons and the
optional - do not use.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] [Commented] (HBASE-5905) Protobuf interface for Admin: split between the internal and the external/customer interface
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5905?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13265928#comment-13265928
]
Todd Lipcon commented on HBASE-5905:
Maybe we can split out an AdminProtocol from an InternalClusterProtocol, etc?
Protobuf interface for Admin: split between the internal and the
external/customer interface
Key: HBASE-5905
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5905
Project: HBase
Issue Type: Improvement
Components: client, master, regionserver
Affects Versions: 0.96.0
Reporter: nkeywal
After a short discussion with Stack, I create a jira.
--
I'am a little bit confused by the protobuf interface for closeRegion.
We have two types of closeRegion today:
1) the external ones; available in client.HBaseAdmin. They take the server
and the region identifier as a parameter and nothing else.
2) The internal ones, called for example by the master. They have more
parameters (like versionOfClosingNode or transitionInZK).
When I look at protobuf.ProtobufUtil, I see:
public static void closeRegion(final AdminProtocol admin,
final byte[] regionName, final boolean transitionInZK) throws
IOException {
CloseRegionRequest closeRegionRequest =
RequestConverter.buildCloseRegionRequest(regionName, transitionInZK);
try {
admin.closeRegion(null, closeRegionRequest);
} catch (ServiceException se) {
throw getRemoteException(se);
}
}
In other words, it seems that we merged the two interfaces into a single one.
Is that the intend?
I checked, the internal fields in closeRegionRequest are all optional (that's
good). Still, it means that the end user could use them or at least would
need to distinguish between the optional for functional reasons and the
optional - do not use.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] [Commented] (HBASE-5905) Protobuf interface for Admin: split between the internal and the external/customer interface
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5905?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13265072#comment-13265072
]
stack commented on HBASE-5905:
--
Sorry N, should have read closer (was running out the door):
bq. In other words, it seems that we merged the two interfaces into a single
one. Is that the intend?
Yes
bq. I checked, the internal fields in closeRegionRequest are all optional
(that's good). Still, it means that the end user could use them or at least
would need to distinguish between the optional for functional reasons and the
optional - do not use.
Agree.
I'd say this minor issue though given pb classes do not come out through pur
admin public api, just the api on servers.
Protobuf interface for Admin: split between the internal and the
external/customer interface
Key: HBASE-5905
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5905
Project: HBase
Issue Type: Improvement
Components: client, master, regionserver
Affects Versions: 0.96.0
Reporter: nkeywal
After a short discussion with Stack, I create a jira.
--
I'am a little bit confused by the protobuf interface for closeRegion.
We have two types of closeRegion today:
1) the external ones; available in client.HBaseAdmin. They take the server
and the region identifier as a parameter and nothing else.
2) The internal ones, called for example by the master. They have more
parameters (like versionOfClosingNode or transitionInZK).
When I look at protobuf.ProtobufUtil, I see:
public static void closeRegion(final AdminProtocol admin,
final byte[] regionName, final boolean transitionInZK) throws
IOException {
CloseRegionRequest closeRegionRequest =
RequestConverter.buildCloseRegionRequest(regionName, transitionInZK);
try {
admin.closeRegion(null, closeRegionRequest);
} catch (ServiceException se) {
throw getRemoteException(se);
}
}
In other words, it seems that we merged the two interfaces into a single one.
Is that the intend?
I checked, the internal fields in closeRegionRequest are all optional (that's
good). Still, it means that the end user could use them or at least would
need to distinguish between the optional for functional reasons and the
optional - do not use.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
[jira] [Commented] (HBASE-5905) Protobuf interface for Admin: split between the internal and the external/customer interface
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5905?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanelfocusedCommentId=13265102#comment-13265102
]
Jimmy Xiang commented on HBASE-5905:
Is there a way to specify a parameter private/internal in pb? Otherwise, we
may end up with some private protocol for internal usage.
Protobuf interface for Admin: split between the internal and the
external/customer interface
Key: HBASE-5905
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5905
Project: HBase
Issue Type: Improvement
Components: client, master, regionserver
Affects Versions: 0.96.0
Reporter: nkeywal
After a short discussion with Stack, I create a jira.
--
I'am a little bit confused by the protobuf interface for closeRegion.
We have two types of closeRegion today:
1) the external ones; available in client.HBaseAdmin. They take the server
and the region identifier as a parameter and nothing else.
2) The internal ones, called for example by the master. They have more
parameters (like versionOfClosingNode or transitionInZK).
When I look at protobuf.ProtobufUtil, I see:
public static void closeRegion(final AdminProtocol admin,
final byte[] regionName, final boolean transitionInZK) throws
IOException {
CloseRegionRequest closeRegionRequest =
RequestConverter.buildCloseRegionRequest(regionName, transitionInZK);
try {
admin.closeRegion(null, closeRegionRequest);
} catch (ServiceException se) {
throw getRemoteException(se);
}
}
In other words, it seems that we merged the two interfaces into a single one.
Is that the intend?
I checked, the internal fields in closeRegionRequest are all optional (that's
good). Still, it means that the end user could use them or at least would
need to distinguish between the optional for functional reasons and the
optional - do not use.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
