Sounds good to me Brian.
St.Ack
Brian Beggs wrote:
My initial thoughts on this was to take the current REST implementation
that returns xml and refactor it so other types of content could be
returned. Separating out the content generation and parsing from the
servlet code.
I do think that it would be beneficial to allow multiple types of
content to be returned by the implementation. I also believe that
adding a new content type should be fairly simple to add. I'm not a fan
of having dual REST implementations as provided by the patch in these
JIRA issues:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-814
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-815
What I think I'm going to do at this point is to refactor the current
REST implementation to allow multiple enocoders and parsers to work with
the servlets.
Brian
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Stack [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 7:08 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: JSON support for HBaseRest
Tom and Andrew, you are right. Response should be based off the
requested content-type (Actually, this is the way it was orginally
written but only XML was every implemented: See
http://tinyurl.com/5podrd).
St.Ack*
*
Tom Nichols wrote:
I agree that you wouldn't want to replace one completely with the
other, but allow for multiple content encodings. We're also
interested in CSV (at least as a retrieval format). The current REST
classes would need to be refactored in order to separate the content
parsing & generation from the actual request and response handling. A
simple switch statement based on the content-type (for request) and
accept header (for response) should be enough; a delegating chain of
command type of pattern could be slightly more flexible in terms of
adding new content encodings, but it would probably be overkill.
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 5:50 PM, Andrew Purtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
From: stack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I'd be on for replacing our current XML-based with JSON
if others were OK with that.
I agree that JSON is preferable to XML as the default response
encoding, but XML should be supported IMHO. In some environments
XML is heavily favored, rightly or wrongly.
- Andy
From: stack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: JSON support for HBaseRest
To: [email protected]
Date: Wednesday, November 19, 2008, 1:06 PM
Sishen Freecity has been looking after our REST interface of
late. He'd be the best person to chat with. From my
POV, for sure we'd be interested. Someone had begun
work on this a while back but it may have been dropped.
I'd be on for replacing our current XML-based with JSON
if others were OK with that.
Thanks Brian,
St.Ack
Brian Beggs wrote:
I am currently working on adding JSON support to the
HBase Rest
implementation. I wanted to contact the HBase
developer community to
see if either something like this was already being
worked on and if
this something that the community would be interested
in having.
Thanks,
Brian
This email and any information disclosed in connection
herewith, whether written or oral, is the property of
EnerNOC, Inc. and is intended only for the person or entity
to which it is addressed. This email may contain
information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise
protected from disclosure. Distributing or copying any
information contained in this email to anyone other than the
intended recipient is strictly prohibited.
This email and any information disclosed in connection herewith, whether written or oral, is the property of EnerNOC, Inc. and is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed.
This email may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure.
Distributing or copying any information contained in this email to anyone other than the intended recipient is strictly prohibited.
