How to configure new thin client connector on the server?

[Vladimir Ozerov]

Igniters,

As you know we are working on a new thin client protocol [1]. Core logic
for base cache operations is ready, so now it is time to discuss how to
configure it on the server. Things are a bit complicated here.

First, we have connector configuration for our old so-called REST client,
see ConnectorConfiguration and IgniteConfiguraion.connectorConfiguration.
We cannot re-use it because it is very heavy-weight and contains a lot of
properties which are simply inapplicable to the new client. E.g.
SSL-related stuff, Jetty configs, etc..

Second, we have connector configuration for our thin SQL drivers (JDBC,
ODBC). See SqlConnectorConfiguration and
IgniteConfiguration.sqlConnectorConfiguration. This configuration is fine
for the new thin client, but it's name is inappropriate.

Essentially, we should rename our SqlConnectorConfiguration to something
more generic, but this "something" cannot be ConnectorConfiguration. Let's
brainstorm how to name it.

My ideas:
- ClientConnectorConfiguration - preferrable
- ListenerConfiguration
- EndpointConfiguration

Any more ideas?

Vladimir.

[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5896

[Pavel Tupitsyn]

Renaming SqlConnectorConfiguration to ClientConnectorConfiguration seems
reasonable to me.

On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Igniters,
>
> As you know we are working on a new thin client protocol [1]. Core logic
> for base cache operations is ready, so now it is time to discuss how to
> configure it on the server. Things are a bit complicated here.
>
> First, we have connector configuration for our old so-called REST client,
> see ConnectorConfiguration and IgniteConfiguraion.connectorConfiguration.
> We cannot re-use it because it is very heavy-weight and contains a lot of
> properties which are simply inapplicable to the new client. E.g.
> SSL-related stuff, Jetty configs, etc..
>
> Second, we have connector configuration for our thin SQL drivers (JDBC,
> ODBC). See SqlConnectorConfiguration and
> IgniteConfiguration.sqlConnectorConfiguration. This configuration is fine
> for the new thin client, but it's name is inappropriate.
>
> Essentially, we should rename our SqlConnectorConfiguration to something
> more generic, but this "something" cannot be ConnectorConfiguration. Let's
> brainstorm how to name it.
>
> My ideas:
> - ClientConnectorConfiguration - preferrable
> - ListenerConfiguration
> - EndpointConfiguration
>
> Any more ideas?
>
> Vladimir.
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5896
>

[Vladimir Ozerov]

Pavel,

Note that this would not be renames, but rather copy+deprecated. Otherwise
we will break compilation of existing applications.

On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Renaming SqlConnectorConfiguration to ClientConnectorConfiguration seems
> reasonable to me.
>
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Igniters,
> >
> > As you know we are working on a new thin client protocol [1]. Core logic
> > for base cache operations is ready, so now it is time to discuss how to
> > configure it on the server. Things are a bit complicated here.
> >
> > First, we have connector configuration for our old so-called REST client,
> > see ConnectorConfiguration and IgniteConfiguraion.
> connectorConfiguration.
> > We cannot re-use it because it is very heavy-weight and contains a lot of
> > properties which are simply inapplicable to the new client. E.g.
> > SSL-related stuff, Jetty configs, etc..
> >
> > Second, we have connector configuration for our thin SQL drivers (JDBC,
> > ODBC). See SqlConnectorConfiguration and
> > IgniteConfiguration.sqlConnectorConfiguration. This configuration is
> fine
> > for the new thin client, but it's name is inappropriate.
> >
> > Essentially, we should rename our SqlConnectorConfiguration to something
> > more generic, but this "something" cannot be ConnectorConfiguration.
> Let's
> > brainstorm how to name it.
> >
> > My ideas:
> > - ClientConnectorConfiguration - preferrable
> > - ListenerConfiguration
> > - EndpointConfiguration
> >
> > Any more ideas?
> >
> > Vladimir.
> >
> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5896
> >
>

[dsetrakyan]

In my opinion all clients, including JDBC, ODBC, and REST should be
implemented over the same protocol and we should not have the protocol mess
we have today.

Vladimir, does your suggestion about ODBC and JDBC include migration to the
new client?

D.

On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 12:39 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Pavel,
>
> Note that this would not be renames, but rather copy+deprecated. Otherwise
> we will break compilation of existing applications.
>
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Renaming SqlConnectorConfiguration to ClientConnectorConfiguration seems
> > reasonable to me.
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Igniters,
> > >
> > > As you know we are working on a new thin client protocol [1]. Core
> logic
> > > for base cache operations is ready, so now it is time to discuss how to
> > > configure it on the server. Things are a bit complicated here.
> > >
> > > First, we have connector configuration for our old so-called REST
> client,
> > > see ConnectorConfiguration and IgniteConfiguraion.
> > connectorConfiguration.
> > > We cannot re-use it because it is very heavy-weight and contains a lot
> of
> > > properties which are simply inapplicable to the new client. E.g.
> > > SSL-related stuff, Jetty configs, etc..
> > >
> > > Second, we have connector configuration for our thin SQL drivers (JDBC,
> > > ODBC). See SqlConnectorConfiguration and
> > > IgniteConfiguration.sqlConnectorConfiguration. This configuration is
> > fine
> > > for the new thin client, but it's name is inappropriate.
> > >
> > > Essentially, we should rename our SqlConnectorConfiguration to
> something
> > > more generic, but this "something" cannot be ConnectorConfiguration.
> > Let's
> > > brainstorm how to name it.
> > >
> > > My ideas:
> > > - ClientConnectorConfiguration - preferrable
> > > - ListenerConfiguration
> > > - EndpointConfiguration
> > >
> > > Any more ideas?
> > >
> > > Vladimir.
> > >
> > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5896
> > >
> >
>

[Vladimir Ozerov]

Dima,

Yes.

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 1:50 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> In my opinion all clients, including JDBC, ODBC, and REST should be
> implemented over the same protocol and we should not have the protocol mess
> we have today.
>
> Vladimir, does your suggestion about ODBC and JDBC include migration to the
> new client?
>
> D.
>
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 12:39 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Pavel,
> >
> > Note that this would not be renames, but rather copy+deprecated.
> Otherwise
> > we will break compilation of existing applications.
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Renaming SqlConnectorConfiguration to ClientConnectorConfiguration
> seems
> > > reasonable to me.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <
> [hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Igniters,
> > > >
> > > > As you know we are working on a new thin client protocol [1]. Core
> > logic
> > > > for base cache operations is ready, so now it is time to discuss how
> to
> > > > configure it on the server. Things are a bit complicated here.
> > > >
> > > > First, we have connector configuration for our old so-called REST
> > client,
> > > > see ConnectorConfiguration and IgniteConfiguraion.
> > > connectorConfiguration.
> > > > We cannot re-use it because it is very heavy-weight and contains a
> lot
> > of
> > > > properties which are simply inapplicable to the new client. E.g.
> > > > SSL-related stuff, Jetty configs, etc..
> > > >
> > > > Second, we have connector configuration for our thin SQL drivers
> (JDBC,
> > > > ODBC). See SqlConnectorConfiguration and
> > > > IgniteConfiguration.sqlConnectorConfiguration. This configuration is
> > > fine
> > > > for the new thin client, but it's name is inappropriate.
> > > >
> > > > Essentially, we should rename our SqlConnectorConfiguration to
> > something
> > > > more generic, but this "something" cannot be ConnectorConfiguration.
> > > Let's
> > > > brainstorm how to name it.
> > > >
> > > > My ideas:
> > > > - ClientConnectorConfiguration - preferrable
> > > > - ListenerConfiguration
> > > > - EndpointConfiguration
> > > >
> > > > Any more ideas?
> > > >
> > > > Vladimir.
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5896
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[dsetrakyan]

In that case, ClientConnectorConfiguration seems like a good name. Can the
migration be done in such a way that the old configuration will be
deprecated, but still work?

D.

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 2:34 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Dima,
>
> Yes.
>
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 1:50 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > In my opinion all clients, including JDBC, ODBC, and REST should be
> > implemented over the same protocol and we should not have the protocol
> mess
> > we have today.
> >
> > Vladimir, does your suggestion about ODBC and JDBC include migration to
> the
> > new client?
> >
> > D.
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 12:39 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Pavel,
> > >
> > > Note that this would not be renames, but rather copy+deprecated.
> > Otherwise
> > > we will break compilation of existing applications.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Pavel Tupitsyn <[hidden email]
> >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Renaming SqlConnectorConfiguration to ClientConnectorConfiguration
> > seems
> > > > reasonable to me.
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <
> > [hidden email]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Igniters,
> > > > >
> > > > > As you know we are working on a new thin client protocol [1]. Core
> > > logic
> > > > > for base cache operations is ready, so now it is time to discuss
> how
> > to
> > > > > configure it on the server. Things are a bit complicated here.
> > > > >
> > > > > First, we have connector configuration for our old so-called REST
> > > client,
> > > > > see ConnectorConfiguration and IgniteConfiguraion.
> > > > connectorConfiguration.
> > > > > We cannot re-use it because it is very heavy-weight and contains a
> > lot
> > > of
> > > > > properties which are simply inapplicable to the new client. E.g.
> > > > > SSL-related stuff, Jetty configs, etc..
> > > > >
> > > > > Second, we have connector configuration for our thin SQL drivers
> > (JDBC,
> > > > > ODBC). See SqlConnectorConfiguration and
> > > > > IgniteConfiguration.sqlConnectorConfiguration. This configuration
> is
> > > > fine
> > > > > for the new thin client, but it's name is inappropriate.
> > > > >
> > > > > Essentially, we should rename our SqlConnectorConfiguration to
> > > something
> > > > > more generic, but this "something" cannot be
> ConnectorConfiguration.
> > > > Let's
> > > > > brainstorm how to name it.
> > > > >
> > > > > My ideas:
> > > > > - ClientConnectorConfiguration - preferrable
> > > > > - ListenerConfiguration
> > > > > - EndpointConfiguration
> > > > >
> > > > > Any more ideas?
> > > > >
> > > > > Vladimir.
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5896
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

[Vladimir Ozerov]

Yes, this is exactly how I am going to implement it.

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> In that case, ClientConnectorConfiguration seems like a good name. Can the
> migration be done in such a way that the old configuration will be
> deprecated, but still work?
>
> D.
>
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 2:34 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Dima,
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 1:50 AM, Dmitriy Setrakyan <
> [hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > In my opinion all clients, including JDBC, ODBC, and REST should be
> > > implemented over the same protocol and we should not have the protocol
> > mess
> > > we have today.
> > >
> > > Vladimir, does your suggestion about ODBC and JDBC include migration to
> > the
> > > new client?
> > >
> > > D.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 12:39 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <
> [hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Pavel,
> > > >
> > > > Note that this would not be renames, but rather copy+deprecated.
> > > Otherwise
> > > > we will break compilation of existing applications.
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Pavel Tupitsyn <
> [hidden email]
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Renaming SqlConnectorConfiguration to ClientConnectorConfiguration
> > > seems
> > > > > reasonable to me.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <
> > > [hidden email]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Igniters,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As you know we are working on a new thin client protocol [1].
> Core
> > > > logic
> > > > > > for base cache operations is ready, so now it is time to discuss
> > how
> > > to
> > > > > > configure it on the server. Things are a bit complicated here.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > First, we have connector configuration for our old so-called REST
> > > > client,
> > > > > > see ConnectorConfiguration and IgniteConfiguraion.
> > > > > connectorConfiguration.
> > > > > > We cannot re-use it because it is very heavy-weight and contains
> a
> > > lot
> > > > of
> > > > > > properties which are simply inapplicable to the new client. E.g.
> > > > > > SSL-related stuff, Jetty configs, etc..
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Second, we have connector configuration for our thin SQL drivers
> > > (JDBC,
> > > > > > ODBC). See SqlConnectorConfiguration and
> > > > > > IgniteConfiguration.sqlConnectorConfiguration. This
> configuration
> > is
> > > > > fine
> > > > > > for the new thin client, but it's name is inappropriate.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Essentially, we should rename our SqlConnectorConfiguration to
> > > > something
> > > > > > more generic, but this "something" cannot be
> > ConnectorConfiguration.
> > > > > Let's
> > > > > > brainstorm how to name it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > My ideas:
> > > > > > - ClientConnectorConfiguration - preferrable
> > > > > > - ListenerConfiguration
> > > > > > - EndpointConfiguration
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Any more ideas?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Vladimir.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-5896
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>