That would be ideal, but asynchbase is being developed according to OpenTSDB’s 
own schedules that we don’t have control over.

They don’t release snapshot artifacts and we needed to make a custom artifact 
anyway, and given the fact that their releases are usually only once a year I’m 
not sure if such PR can be merged in the foreseeable future.

So this patch (as well as the custom artifact and all that jazz) is a temporary 
measure until there is the next Asynchbase release that contains the features 
we need.

I remember that Doyoung made such PR sometime in the past, but I couldn’t 
locate it now.


JW

> On Sep 27, 2016, at 2:57 AM, Sergio Fernández <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> As far as I understood, such changes affect mainly configuration (timeouts,
> limits, offsets, etc), right?
> Would not be better to submit a PR to the upstream project to allow to
> customize such configurations without modifying the code?
> 
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 8:49 AM, Jong Wook Kim <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> Related to the recent comments raised in the vote thread, I’d like to
>> revisit the asynchbase issue.
>> 
>> Now their fixes on NSRE are tagged in the recently fixed 1.7.2 on Maven
>> Central, the remaining differences between our custom version and the
>> official version are:
>> 
>> - RPC-wise timeout setting in Scanner
>> - limit and offset setting in GetRequest
>> 
>> I made a small patch, as seen in here <https://github.com/jongwook/
>> incubator-s2graph/commit/ad5c7f89e46ddbd5dfd9b8721737aa22f94b4002>, which
>> includes GetRequest.java and Scanner.java in the s2core tree along with a
>> utility that forces loading the bytecode from s2core’s classpath.
>> 
>> Having two ~1000-line java files which are duplicates might be a bad
>> practice, but it eliminates the need to maintain a separate codebase and
>> maven repository for those small patches.
>> 
>> To be more aesthetically satisfying, I’ve fiddled a little bit with
>> bytebuddy <http://bytebuddy.net/#/> to make runtime modification of the
>> behaviors of those classes, but the modifications are kindof scattered
>> making it harder to write the dynamic proxy.
>> 
>> I’d appreciate any comments on the patch above.
>> 
>> JW
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Sergio Fernández
> Partner Technology Manager
> Redlink GmbH
> m: +43 6602747925
> e: [email protected]
> w: http://redlink.co

Reply via email to