"how complex should it be to rip out the chronicle format, insert some other well defined and well known, and handle log rolling ourselves".
I think that it will be actually easier to do after CEP-12 is in because as I mentioned it does housekeeping of what is there rigth now and refactors it a little bit so throwing away the guts of it should be isolated only to actual BinLog class and stuff around that which is built on top of Chronicle. "There a reason we can't move forward with CEP-12 w/out addressing the chronicle stuff? i.e." I think there is not any. "Why would CEP-12 be heavily coupled with chronicle?" - it would not be heavier from what is already there for audit of fql. Chronicle here basically acts as a sink. Actually, that patch also makes the implementations of (diagnostic too) loggers pluggable (via coding against an interface and putting that on the class path) so people might already write it to whatever they want - even to something protobuf-like. If they do not want to use Chronicle as a sink, by implementing their own logger, they could just put it wherever they want. I think that I forgot to mention this aspect. So the whole solution we have is already not hard-wired to Chronicle necessarily. It is just something we provide out of the box. On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 3:57 PM Josh McKenzie <jmcken...@apache.org> wrote: > I hear you. Not trying to shoehorn a change in w/CEP-12, just thinking > through "how complex should it be to rip out the chronicle format, insert > some other well defined and well known, and handle log rolling ourselves". > My preference (which I didn't indicate earlier) would be to have that done > independently. > > There a reason we can't move forward with CEP-12 w/out addressing the > chronicle stuff? i.e. > > I would like to have this resolved because there is CEP-12 I plan to > deliver and I hit this and I do not want to base that work on something we > might eventually abandon. > > Why would CEP-12 be heavily coupled with chronicle? I would assume you'd > be able to make light use of the existing logging + log rolling, and then > someone else could come along and easily rip out chronicle and the rolling > and add in a different one with minimal code changes? > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2024, at 9:15 AM, Štefan Miklošovič wrote: > > I don't understand why CEP-12 should be a vehicle for introducing changes > like that. That is something totally unrelated. I am not going to be the > one to implement anything beyond CEP-12 and I am not the one who is going > to replace it either so if we make it a hard requirement for CEP-12 then > CEP-12 as it is will never be introduced. Just want to be clear about that. > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 3:09 PM Brandon Williams <dri...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 7:55 AM Josh McKenzie <jmcken...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > I'd strongly support either rolling the format change into the CEP-12 > proposal or having another CEP for introducing protobuf, spark, etc - some > kind of more broadly adopted format, and removing chronicle from our stack. > > +1, I too would strongly support an open format and removing chronicle. > > Kind Regards, > Brandon > > >
