Do we have a migration story ready to go for folks that are used to seeing
traces on the monitor?

On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 5:17 PM, Tony Kurc <trk...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I like this idea.
>
> On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 5:09 PM, Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Devs,
> >
> > (This discussion is somewhat of a spinoff of our previous recent
> > conversation about HTrace, but I'd like to narrow the discussion to one
> > specific topic regarding our tracer service.)
> >
> > I'd like to remove Accumulo's tracer service and corresponding
> > presentations in the monitor for 2.0.
> >
> > The tracer service currently acts as a sink for the traces from Accumulo.
> >
> > While there is interest in tracing Accumulo, and Accumulo may itself be
> > suitable (with the right schema) for storing traces, I do not think
> acting
> > as a "trace sink" is really the kind of thing we should be doing as part
> of
> > Accumulo's out-of-the-box core functionality.
> >
> > Also, the presentation and search capabilities of the traces found in the
> > trace table (by convention, and assumed by the monitor) is far from an
> > ideal presentation of this data, and I don't think the Accumulo project
> > should continue maintaining that inside the core project's monitor,
> either.
> >
> > I think we should encourage interested volunteers to contribute to other
> > trace presentation software (wherever they may exist) any necessary
> > "backing store" implementation based on Accumulo.
> >
> > None of this would remove tracing instrumentation from Accumulo... it
> would
> > just require users interested in trace data from Accumulo to configure an
> > appropriate sink to collect that data in some other integrated component
> of
> > their overall architecture.
> >
> > Decoupling the integrated trace sink from the instrumentation in Accumulo
> > like this could even be a step towards providing support for multiple
> > different tracing libraries. (I guess we could do this now, but it would
> be
> > easier if we were not also trying to provide a sink implementation for
> one
> > specific version of one specific instrumentation library.)
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
>

Reply via email to