[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-487?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
stack updated HBASE-487:
------------------------
Attachment: module_in_bin.patch
This patch adds a module named HBase.rb to $HBASE_HOME/bin. It then adds '-r
$HBASE_HOME/bin/HBase.rb' to the irb invocation. The module runs the magic
'include Java' invocation, imports basic HBase types, sets the prompt, and then
has defines for 'help' and 'version'. Here's how it looks currently:
{code}
durruti:~/Documents/checkouts/trunk stack$ ./bin/hbase shell
irb: warn: can't alias help from irb_help.
hbase(main):001:0> help
HBase Shell Commands:
version Output the hbase version
...
=> nil
hbase(main):002:0> version
TODO: 0.2.x
=> nil
hbase(main):003:0>
{code}
There's some namespace issue that needs to be fixed -- the 'irb: warn: can't
alias help from irb_help'. Need to fix the '=> nil' return too.
This HBase.rb looks like could be place to put the hbase DSL.
We could use this and the src/ruby dir. The latter could hold fat ruby scripts
or debugging code (if its findable on CLASSPATH from jirb).
> Replace hql w/ a hbase-friendly jirb or jython shell
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-487
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-487
> Project: Hadoop HBase
> Issue Type: Wish
> Reporter: stack
> Assignee: stack
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 0.2.0
>
> Attachments: groovy-2.patch, groovy.patch, jruby.patch,
> module_in_bin.patch, rb.patch
>
>
> The hbase shell is a useful admin and debugging tool but it has a couple of
> downsides. To extend, a fragile parser definition needs tinkering-with and
> new java classes must be added. The current test suite for hql is lacking
> coverage and the current code could do with a rewrite having evolved
> piecemeal. Another downside is that the presence of an HQL interpreter gives
> the mis-impression that hbase is like a SQL database.
> This 'wish' issue suggests that we jettison HQL and instead offer users a
> jirb or jython command line. We'd ship with some scripts and jruby/jython
> classes that we'd source on startup to do things like import base client
> classes -- so folks wouldn't have to remember all the packages stuff sat in
> -- and added a pretty-print for scanners and getters outputting text, xhtml
> or binary. They would also make it easy to do HQL-things in jruby/python
> script.
> Advantages: Already-written parser with no need of extension probing deeper
> into hbase: i.e. better for debugging than HQL could ever be. Easy extension
> adding scripts/modules rather than java code. Less likely hbase could be
> confused for a SQL db.
> Downsides: Probably more verbose. Requires ruby or python knowledge
> ("Everyone knows some sql"). Big? (jruby lib is 24M).
> I was going to write security as downside but HQL suffers this at the moment
> too -- though it has been possible to sort the updates from the selects in
> the UI to prevent modification of the db from the UI, something that would be
> hard to do in a jruby/jython parser.
> What do others think?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
