Hi, One thing to point out here is there were a few timestamp fields that exist for Split-join enrichment topology that haven't been made to the unified one. For example, there is no threat intel bolt timestamp. There might be some SLA related use cases regarding these timestamp fields that might be nice to have before depreciation of the split-join one. Generally speaking, makes sense to deprecate split-join topology, though.
Cheers, Ali On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 3:40 AM James Sirota <jsir...@apache.org> wrote: > This is excellent work, Mike and long overdue. Thanks for doing this > > 05.11.2018, 16:46, "Michael Miklavcic" <michael.miklav...@gmail.com>: > > The PR has now been merged into master and closed. > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-1855 > > > > On Sat, Nov 3, 2018 at 6:47 PM Michael Miklavcic < > > michael.miklav...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> PR is out here - https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/1252 > >> > >> I made the unified enrichment topology the new default and marked the > >> split-join topology as deprecated in various parts of the > documentation. I > >> think we should have a release with the deprecation notes and new > default > >> and then move to remove split-join entirely shortly thereafter. > >> > >> Best, > >> Mike > >> > >> On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 5:47 AM Mohan Venkateshaiah < > >> mvenkatesha...@hortonworks.com> wrote: > >> > >>> +1 (non-binding) > >>> > >>> Thanks > >>> Mohan DV > >>> > >>> On 11/2/18, 3:29 PM, "zeo...@gmail.com" <zeo...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > >>> +1 totally agree. > >>> > >>> Jon > >>> > >>> On Fri, Nov 2, 2018, 1:31 AM Anand Subramanian < > >>> asubraman...@hortonworks.com> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> > Piling on my +1 (non-binding) as well. > >>> > > >>> > On 11/2/18, 4:41 AM, "Ryan Merriman" <merrim...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>> > > >>> > +1 > >>> > > >>> > On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 5:38 PM Casey Stella <ceste...@gmail.com > >>> > > >>> > wrote: > >>> > > >>> > > +1 > >>> > > On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 18:34 Nick Allen <n...@nickallen.org> > >>> wrote: > >>> > > > >>> > > > +1 > >>> > > > > >>> > > > On Thu, Nov 1, 2018, 6:27 PM Justin Leet < > >>> justinjl...@gmail.com> > >>> > wrote: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > +1, I haven't seen any case where the split-join topology > >>> isn't > >>> > made > >>> > > > > obsolete by the unified topology. > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 6:17 PM Michael Miklavcic < > >>> > > > > michael.miklav...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > Fellow Metronians, > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > We've had the unified enrichment topology around for a > >>> number > >>> > of > >>> > > months > >>> > > > > > now, it has proved itself stable, and there is yet to > >>> be a > >>> > time that > >>> > > I > >>> > > > > have > >>> > > > > > seen the split-join topology outperform the unified > >>> one. Here > >>> > are > >>> > > some > >>> > > > > > simple reasons to deprecate the split-join topology. > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > 1. Unified topology performs better. > >>> > > > > > 2. The configuration, especially for performance > >>> tuning is > >>> > much, > >>> > > > much > >>> > > > > > simpler in the unified model. > >>> > > > > > 3. The footprint within the cluster is smaller. > >>> > > > > > 4. One of the first activities for any install is > >>> that we > >>> > spend > >>> > > time > >>> > > > > > instructing users to switch to the unified topology. > >>> > > > > > 5. One less moving part to maintain. > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > I'd like to recommend that we deprecate the split-join > >>> > topology and > >>> > > > make > >>> > > > > > the unified enrichment topology the new default. > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > Best, > >>> > > > > > Mike > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > -- > >>> > >>> Jon Zeolla > > ------------------- > Thank you, > > James Sirota > PMC- Apache Metron > jsirota AT apache DOT org > > -- A.Nazemian
