[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20894?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16548269#comment-16548269
]
Mike Drob commented on HBASE-20894:
-----------------------------------
Thanks for asking, [~vrodionov].
Java object serialization is very brittle. There's no reason to be storing the
full object graph when we really just want to be storing some data. This will
give us more flexibility in the future for what we do and how we persist things.
I'm not going to be a fanatical champion for protobuf here, it just seemed like
a straightforward solution given that we already have PB for other things.
Personally, I wouldn't oppose a solution that uses some other format like XML
or JSON or SequenceFile or whatever.
I'm not too concerned about the performance minutia of this, since it should
only be happening on startup and shutdown. I also don't think the impact of the
generated code is too great. I imagine that the space used on disk is going to
be less with PB than with object serialization, but again, that's not a real
concern for me either.
I'm having trouble reading if you're opposed to this change or if you are
trying to understand the motivation, can you clarify?
> Move BucketCache from java serialization to protobuf
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-20894
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20894
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: BucketCache
> Affects Versions: 2.0.0
> Reporter: Mike Drob
> Priority: Major
> Fix For: 3.0.0
>
> Attachments: HBASE-20894.WIP-2.patch, HBASE-20894.WIP.patch
>
>
> We should use a better serialization format instead of Java Serialization for
> the BucketCache entry persistence.
> Suggested by Chris McCown, who does not appear to have a JIRA account.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
