Pirk-ES is more of a Source input (to be more technically precise) so it
doesn't warrant being a spearate module of its own.

But I am not sure about pirk-hadoop and pirk-storm aren't they both
different responder impls (??)

ElasticSearch should just be an input source like HDFS and doesn't need to
be a separate module. Flink has a plugin for Elasticsearch Sink, similarly
Spark has one too for Elasticsearch source and sink.

*Question:* Is it ever possible now or in the future that Pirk could be
used for its Query-only, Responder-only or in applications that may need
both.

If so, then we should be looking at generating separate artifacts for
pirk-query, pirk-spark-responder, pirk-storm-responder etc...

It may help to start a shared Google doc and gather all comments, its so
hard to keep track of all this in emails.

Most other projects like Kafka, Flink do it that way - if its ok with all
we should start doing the same on Pirk.




On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 10:38 PM, Darin Johnson <dbjohnson1...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Suneel, I'll try to put a couple jiras on it tonight with my thoughts.
> Based off my pirk-63 I was able to pull spark and storm out with no
> issues.  I was planning to pull them out, then tackling elastic search,
> then hadoop as it's a little entrenched.  This should keep most PRs to
> manageable chunks. I think once that's done addressing the configs will
> make more sense.
>
> I'm open to suggestions. But the hope would be:
> Pirk-parent
> Pirk-core
> Pirk-hadoop
> Pirk-storm
> Pirk-parent
>
> Pirk-es is a little weird as it's really just an inputformat, seems like
> there's a more general solution here than creating submodules for every
> inputformat.
>
> Darin
>
> On Sep 19, 2016 1:00 PM, "Suneel Marthi" <smar...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> >
>
> > Refactor is definitely a first priority.  Is there a design/proposal
> draft
> > that we could comment on about how to go about refactoring the code.  I
> > have been trying to keep up with the emails but definitely would have
> > missed some.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 6:57 PM, Ellison Anne Williams <
> > eawilli...@apache.org <eawilli...@apache.org>> wrote:
> >
> > > Agree - let's leave the config/CLI the way it is for now and tackle
> that as
> > > a subsequent design discussion and PR.
> > >
> > > Also, I think that we should leave the ResponderDriver and the
> > > ResponderProps alone for this PR and push to a subsequent PR (once we
> > > decide if and how we would like to delegate each).
> > >
> > > I vote to remove the 'platform' option and the backwards compatibility
> in
> > > this PR and proceed with having a ResponderLauncher interface and
> forcing
> > > its implementation by the ResponderDriver.
> > >
> > > And, I am not so concerned with having one fat jar vs. multiple jars
> right
> > > now - to me, at this point, it's a 'nice to have' and not a 'must have'
> for
> > > Pirk functionality. We do need to break out Pirk into more clearly
> defined
> > > submodules (which is in progress) - via this re-factor, I think that we
> > > will gain some ability to generate multiple jars which is nice.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 12:19 PM, Tim Ellison <t.p.elli...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 19/09/16 15:46, Darin Johnson wrote:
> > > > > Hey guys,
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for looking at the PR, I apologize if it offended anyone's
> > > eyes:).
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm glad it generated some discussion about the configuration.  I
> > > didn't
> > > > > really like where things were heading with the config.  However,
> didn't
> > > > > want to create to much scope creep.
> > > > >
> > > > > I think any hierarchical config (TypeSafe or yaml) would make
> things
> > > much
> > > > > more maintainable, the plugin could simply grab the appropriate
> part of
> > > > the
> > > > > config and handle accordingly.  I'd also cut down the number of
> command
> > > > > line options to only those that change between runs often (like
> > > > > input/output)
> > > > >
> > > > >> One option is to make Pirk pluggable, so that a Pirk installation
> > > could
> > > > >> use one or more of these in an extensible fashion by adding JAR
> files.
> > > > >> That would still require selecting one by command-line argument.
> > > > >
> > > > > An argument for this approach is for lambda architecture approaches
> > > (say
> > > > > spark/spark-streaming) were the contents of the jars would be so
> > > similar
> > > > it
> > > > > seems like to much trouble to create separate jars.
> > > > >
> > > > > Happy to continue working on this given some direction on where
> you'd
> > > > like
> > > > > it to go.  Also, it's a bit of a blocker to refactoring the build
> into
> > > > > submodules.
> > > >
> > > > FWIW my 2c is to not try and fix all the problems in one go, and
> rather
> > > > take a compromise on the configurations while you tease apart the
> > > > submodules in to separate source code trees, poms, etc; then come
> back
> > > > and fix the runtime configs.
> > > >
> > > > Once the submodules are in place it will open up more work for
> release
> > > > engineering and tinkering that can be done in parallel with the
> config
> > > > polishing.
> > > >
> > > > Just a thought.
> > > > Tim
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 9:33 AM, Tim Ellison <
> t.p.elli...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> On 19/09/16 13:40, Ellison Anne Williams wrote:
> > > > >>> It seems that it's the same idea as the ResponderLauncher with
> the
> > > > >> service
> > > > >>> component added to maintain something akin to the 'platform'. I
> would
> > > > >>> prefer that we just did away with the platform notion altogether
> and
> > > > make
> > > > >>> the ResponderDriver 'dumb'. We get around needing a
> platform-aware
> > > > >> service
> > > > >>> by requiring the ResponderLauncher implementation to be passed as
> a
> > > CLI
> > > > >> to
> > > > >>> the ResponderDriver.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Let me check I understand what you are saying here.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> At the moment, there is a monolithic Pirk that hard codes how to
> > > respond
> > > > >> using lots of different backends (mapreduce, spark,
> sparkstreaming,
> > > > >> storm , standalone), and that is selected by command-line
> argument.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> One option is to make Pirk pluggable, so that a Pirk installation
> > > could
> > > > >> use one or more of these in an extensible fashion by adding JAR
> files.
> > > > >> That would still require selecting one by command-line argument.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> A second option is to simply pass in the required backend JAR to
> > > select
> > > > >> the particular implementation you choose, as a specific Pirk
> > > > >> installation doesn't need to use multiple backends simultaneously.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> ...and you are leaning towards the second option.  Do I have that
> > > > correct?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Regards,
> > > > >> Tim
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> Am I missing something? Is there a good reason to provide a
> service
> > > by
> > > > >>> which platforms are registered? I'm open...
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 8:28 AM, Tim Ellison <
> t.p.elli...@gmail.com>
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> How about an approach like this?
> > > > >>>>    https://github.com/tellison/incubator-pirk/tree/pirk-63
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> The "on-ramp" is the driver [1], which calls upon the service to
> > > find
> > > > a
> > > > >>>> plug-in [2] that claims to implement the required platform
> > > responder,
> > > > >>>> e.g. [3].
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> The list of plug-ins is given in the provider's JAR file, so the
> > > ones
> > > > we
> > > > >>>> provide in Pirk are listed together [4], but if you split these
> into
> > > > >>>> modules, or somebody brings their own JAR alongside, these would
> be
> > > > >>>> listed in each JAR's services/ directory.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> [1]
> > > > >>>> https://github.com/tellison/incubator-pirk/blob/pirk-63/
> > > > >>>> src/main/java/org/apache/pirk/responder/wideskies/
> > > > ResponderDriver.java
> > > > >>>> [2]
> > > > >>>> https://github.com/tellison/incubator-pirk/blob/pirk-63/
> > > > >>>> src/main/java/org/apache/pirk/responder/spi/ResponderPlugin.
> java
> > > > >>>> [3]
> > > > >>>> https://github.com/tellison/incubator-pirk/blob/pirk-63/
> > > > >>>> src/main/java/org/apache/pirk/responder/wideskies/storm/
> > > > >>>> StormResponder.java
> > > > >>>> [4]
> > > > >>>> https://github.com/tellison/incubator-pirk/blob/pirk-63/
> > > > >>>> src/main/services/org.apache.responder.spi.Responder
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> I'm not even going to dignify this with a WIP PR, it is far from
> > > > ready,
> > > > >>>> so proceed with caution.  There is hopefully enough there to
> show
> > > the
> > > > >>>> approach, and if it is worth continuing I'm happy to do so.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Regards,
> > > > >>>> Tim
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
>

Reply via email to