[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-3904?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14697758#comment-14697758
]
Li Lu commented on YARN-3904:
-----------------------------
Thanks [~vrushalic]! I agree we should not make a public dropTable api.
Actually in my code I'm restricting the accessibility of this method to test
only.
About the special characters, the comma and question marks are used for
prepared SQL statements in JDBC, which should be quite stable by now. But I
agree that we should clean up the sql statements when we touch this part in
future.
For now, if it's fine with all of us, maybe we can put this in and move forward
with the offline aggregation implementations? Thanks!
> Refactor timelineservice.storage to add support to online and offline
> aggregation writers
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: YARN-3904
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-3904
> Project: Hadoop YARN
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: timelineserver
> Reporter: Li Lu
> Assignee: Li Lu
> Attachments: YARN-3904-YARN-2928.001.patch,
> YARN-3904-YARN-2928.002.patch, YARN-3904-YARN-2928.003.patch,
> YARN-3904-YARN-2928.004.patch, YARN-3904-YARN-2928.005.patch,
> YARN-3904-YARN-2928.006.patch, YARN-3904-YARN-2928.007.patch,
> YARN-3904-YARN-2928.008.patch, YARN-3904-YARN-2928.009.patch
>
>
> After we finished the design for time-based aggregation, we can adopt our
> existing Phoenix storage into the storage of the aggregated data. In this
> JIRA, I'm proposing to refactor writers to add support to aggregation
> writers. Offline aggregation writers typically has less contextual
> information. We can distinguish these writers by special naming. We can also
> use CollectorContexts to model all contextual information and use it in our
> writer interfaces.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
