Cool. I will prepare a patch and post on HIVE-2038.
Ashutosh
On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 16:59, John Sichi wrote:
> Yeah, thinking about it more, they're likely to end up looking different.
> The listener should cover most possible repository changes, whereas
> HiveMetaHook is focused on a narrower
Yeah, thinking about it more, they're likely to end up looking different. The
listener should cover most possible repository changes, whereas HiveMetaHook is
focused on a narrower set of object definitions.
JVS
On Mar 9, 2011, at 1:48 PM, Ashutosh Chauhan wrote:
> It might be possible to exte
It might be possible to extend and modify the HiveMetaHook interface.
But, I think keeping them separate is better because MetaHook and
MetaStoreListener are interfaces for two different functionalities.
MetaHook is for communicating with external system if there is a need
for it. MetaStoreListener
Couldn't we reuse HiveMetaHook for this new purpose (with an instance loaded
via global config vs associated with the table handler)?
JVS
On Mar 8, 2011, at 2:12 PM, Ashutosh Chauhan wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have a requirement that every time some change on metastore takes
> place, we have some
Hi all,
I have a requirement that every time some change on metastore takes
place, we have some logic which needs to be run. For example, if a new
table is getting created in metastore I want to send a message to a
message bus. Easiest way for this to work is to add the logic in
createTable(). Con
