Sorry, it was my misunderstanding. We still have no plan to support Thrift interface.
Sincerely, Jihoon On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 2:32 PM Jihoon Son <[email protected]> wrote: > I missed one thing. > It is not true that we will not provide the Thrift interface. > We will provide the Thrift interface using REST. > > Sincerely, > Jihoon > > > On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 2:28 PM Jihoon Son <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Jerryjung, thanks for your suggestion. >> As you said, Thrift will be faster and more lightweight than REST. >> However, most native protocols are faster than REST. So, this cannot be a >> reason for using Thrift. >> >> Alternatively, maintaining various types of protocols can be an option. >> However, this will cause much greater maintenance cost. >> >> Even though the link which you gave above is not for comparing the >> performance Thrift and REST protocols, there is a paragraph as follows. >> >> There are two main approaches for doing that: One is the Thrift interface >>> <http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/Hbase/ThriftApi>, which is the faster >>> and more lightweight of the two options. The other way to access HBase is >>> using the REST interface <http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/Hbase/Stargate>, >>> which uses HTTP verbs to perform an action, giving developers a wide choice >>> of languages and programs to use. >>> >> >> As indicated here, REST can be a good candidate to support various >> languages and programs. >> In addition, I think that the performance of Client APIs does not matter >> because it's contribution to the entire query performance is very little. >> >> Welcome any arguments. >> >> Sincerely, >> Jihoon >> >> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 2:01 PM 최승운 <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I give +1 to maintain both rest and thrift. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Seungun. >>> ________________________________________ >>> 보낸 사람: 정유선 <[email protected]> >>> 보낸 날짜: 2015년 3월 13일 금요일 오후 1:33 >>> 받는 사람: [email protected] >>> 제목: RE: [DISCUSSION] Portable remote client APIs >>> >>> I suggest another option. >>> What do you think about two options for remote interface? >>> Thrift is the faster and more lightweight than REST. >>> Please refer this article. >>> - http://blog.cloudera.com/blog/2013/03/how-to-use-the-apache- >>> hbase-rest-interface-part-1/ >>> It describes various ways to access and interact with HBase. >>> Both of them, giving developers a wide choice of languages and programs >>> to use. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Yousun Jeong. >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Hyunsik Choi [mailto:[email protected]] >>> Sent: Friday, March 13, 2015 8:34 AM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSSION] Portable remote client APIs >>> >>> We seem to get a consent to use REST API. I'll wait for one more day, >>> and then we can decide this issue. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Hyunsik >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 7:56 AM, Hyoungjun Kim <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > Hi all, >>> > >>> > I give +1 to REST API. >>> > I think REST is more common. >>> > >>> > Warm regards, >>> > Hyoungjun >>> > 2015. 3. 12. 오후 10:41에 "Jihun Kang" <[email protected]>님이 작성: >>> > >>> >> Hello All, >>> >> >>> >> I would give +1 to REST API Implementation. Even Protobuf and Thrift >>> >> give flexibility and extensibility to programmers, but entry barriers >>> >> for these frameworks are extremely high. Also, if we want to make >>> >> another client implementation for other programming languages, we >>> >> need to figure out that these framework have code generator feature >>> for that programming language. >>> >> >>> >> 2015-03-12 20:18 GMT+09:00 Jaehwa Jung <[email protected]>: >>> >> >>> >> > Hi guys >>> >> > >>> >> > +1 for Hyunsik's suggestion. >>> >> > >>> >> > REST API may be more efficient for code maintenance and various >>> >> > clients implementation. >>> >> > >>> >> > Cheers >>> >> > Jaehwa >>> >> > +1 RESTful API for code maintenance >>> >> > >>> >> > -Jinho >>> >> > Best regards >>> >> > >>> >> > 2015-03-12 17:56 GMT+09:00 CharSyam <[email protected]>: >>> >> > >>> >> > > +1 >>> >> > > >>> >> > > I also agree with hyunsik's suggesttion. >>> >> > > I think it is better to make language binding to use Rest API. >>> >> > > It will be more efficient and less effort :) >>> >> > > >>> >> > > 2015-03-12 17:38 GMT+09:00 Jihoon Son <[email protected]>: >>> >> > > >>> >> > > > +1 for Hyunsik's suggestion. >>> >> > > > I totally agree with you. >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > > Warm regards, >>> >> > > > Jihoon >>> >> > > > 2015년 3월 12일 (목) 오후 5:35, Hyunsik Choi <[email protected]>님이 >>> 작성: >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > > > Here is my suggestion. >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > I prefer REST API. I think that it would be better than other >>> >> > > > > due >>> >> to >>> >> > > > > the following reasons: >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > * No dependency - most of script languages do not need any >>> >> > dependency >>> >> > > > > for this approach. Also, C and C++ just needs json library >>> >> > > > > for this approach. Please look at JSON for Modern C++ >>> >> > > > > (https://github.com/nlohmann/json). It just requires to >>> >> > > > > include >>> >> one >>> >> > > > > header and one source file. As a result, there is no >>> >> > > > > dependency problem. >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > * Portability - most of script languages basically support >>> >> > > > > REST >>> >> and >>> >> > > > > JSON. They don't need client implementation. They can just >>> >> > > > > use REST and JSON features in order to access Tajo. If >>> >> > > > > necessary, we can >>> >> make >>> >> > > > > easily some helper libraries for other languages. >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > * Secure - It is easy to provide the secure channel and >>> >> > > > > authentication method too. Basically, many HTTP API provides >>> >> > > > > HTTP >>> >> > over >>> >> > > > > SSL. >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > Jihoon Kang already started REST API work. If others start to >>> >> develop >>> >> > > > > clients for other languages like C/C++ client over REST API >>> >> > > > > after >>> >> his >>> >> > > > > work, it would be best for us. >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > Best regards, >>> >> > > > > Hyunsik >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > > On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 1:32 AM, Hyunsik Choi >>> >> > > > > <[email protected]> >>> >> > > > wrote: >>> >> > > > > > Hi folks, >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > Recently, there are three trials to add new remote client >>> APIs. >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > * C/C++ Client over Thrift - https://issues.apache.org/ >>> >> > > > > jira/browse/TAJO-1264 >>> >> > > > > > * Add REST Client API - >>> >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAJO-1331 >>> >> > > > > > * Tajo Python Native Client - https://issues.apache.org/ >>> >> > > > > jira/browse/TAJO-1367 >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > In some aspect, I'm very happy to discuss such an issue. I >>> >> haven't >>> >> > > > > > expected that we are discuss and vote for duplicated >>> efforts. >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > BTW, it would be great if we do not spend our resource on >>> >> > duplicated >>> >> > > > > works. >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > In order to rearrange this duplicated works, we need some >>> >> > discussion >>> >> > > > > > about their pros and cons. I hope that we consent our >>> >> > > > > > direction >>> >> > after >>> >> > > > > > this discussion. Otherwise, we can call for a vote for the >>> >> > approach. >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > Best regards, >>> >> > > > > > Hyunsik >>> >> > > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> > > >>> >> > >>> >> >>> >>
