It might be possible to extend and modify the HiveMetaHook interface. But, I think keeping them separate is better because MetaHook and MetaStoreListener are interfaces for two different functionalities. MetaHook is for communicating with external system if there is a need for it. MetaStoreListener observe changes on metastore and run some logic in response to those changes. What do you think?
Ashutosh On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 13:36, John Sichi <jsi...@fb.com> wrote: > Couldn't we reuse HiveMetaHook for this new purpose (with an instance loaded > via global config vs associated with the table handler)? > > JVS > > On Mar 8, 2011, at 2:12 PM, Ashutosh Chauhan wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> I have a requirement that every time some change on metastore takes >> place, we have some logic which needs to be run. For example, if a new >> table is getting created in metastore I want to send a message to a >> message bus. Easiest way for this to work is to add the logic in >> createTable(). Control it by a hiveConf param and turn it off by >> default. Alternative way is via hooks. Have this extra logic in hook >> and then load and fire the hook if its available. Does anyone has an >> opinion which of these two is preferable. Second one requires new hook >> loading and execution logic. I am currently interested in four >> functions: createTable() dropTable() addPartition() dropPartition(). >> Current, HiveMetaHook which exists in createTable() doesn't perfectly >> fit the bill, since it is fired only when user expresses it in his >> create table statement (i.e., if he has specified a storage handler) >> Instead I want to have this logic always run. >> If it is unclear, let me know, I can post the code which can >> demonstrate my usecase. >> >> Ashutosh > >
