I'd be happy if KeyValue is the only class implementing Writable :)
________________________________ From: Jimmy Xiang <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Cc: lars hofhansl <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2012 1:46 PM Subject: Re: State of protobufs in hbase-0.96 We can't completely purge Writables since we are still using KV in HFile. Are we going to convert the file format too? If so, we need some migration strategy. Thanks, Jimmy On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 1:41 PM, Gary Helmling <[email protected]> wrote: > Yep, the initial conversion work (HBASE-5448) only deprecated > CoprocessorProtocol, but in subsequent discussion I think the universal > consensus was to remove it completely for 0.96 and go PB-only. Otherwise > we can't completely purge Writables for 0.96. > > > > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> wrote: > >> We agreed to remove Writables from coprocessors and go PB-only for 0.96. >> This way, to avoid building up any transitional cruft. >> >> >> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 1:29 PM, lars hofhansl <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > I thought for coprocessors we had decided to only deprecate the old >> > protocol. I'm +1 removing it, though, because it let's us potentially get >> > rid of all Writables. >> > >> > >> > >> > ________________________________ >> > From: Gary Helmling <[email protected]> >> > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>; lars hofhansl < >> > [email protected]> >> > Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2012 11:45 AM >> > Subject: Re: State of protobufs in hbase-0.96 >> > >> > >> > For coprocessor endpoints, we have >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-6895 as an umbrella issue >> for >> > removing the Writable based CoprocessorProtocol support. >> > >> > There are still a few subtasks to work through to get there, but once >> done >> > we can pull out CoprocessorProtocol, Exec, ExecResult, >> > HTable.coprocessorProxy(), HTable.coprocessorExec() and any other >> > supporting code. >> > >> > >> > >> > On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 10:54 AM, lars hofhansl <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > >> > HBASE-7215 has a rant about the current state of the protobuf work in >> > 0.96... Continuing here... >> > > >> > >HBASE-7215 came about because I simply wanted to add a field to Mutation >> > (Put, Delete, etc) for HBASE-5954. >> > > >> > >Should be easy now with protobufs, right? Nope! >> > > >> > >- Both Put and Delete (and Result, Action, MultiAction, MultiResponse, >> > MultiPut, MultiResponse, etc, etc, etc) are still implementing Writable >> and >> > are still used that way. >> > >- After I dug in I found that Writable is literally all over the place >> > still. >> > >- In some cases we even serialize an Object as Writable inside a >> protobuf >> > message. >> > >- HBaseObjectWritable is still around and still used all over the place >> > > >> > >So what we have now has Writables and Protobuf code, worse than it was >> > before (lots of extra code, two ways to serialize stuff, and still no >> wire >> > compatibility). >> > > >> > >HBASE-7215 will fix some of the stuff, but there's a lot more to do. >> > > >> > >-- Lars >> > > >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> >> - Andy >> >> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein >> (via Tom White) >>
