haridsv commented on code in PR #6623: URL: https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/6623#discussion_r2020538234
########## hbase-client/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/client/QueryMetrics.java: ########## @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ +/* + * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one + * or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file + * distributed with this work for additional information + * regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file + * to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the + * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance + * with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at + * + * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 + * + * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software + * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, + * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. + * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and + * limitations under the License. + */ +package org.apache.hadoop.hbase.client; + +import org.apache.yetus.audience.InterfaceAudience; + [email protected] +public class QueryMetrics { Review Comment: > We'll still need to introduce this new pattern to enable metrics at the granularity that we want (per-result). I am not sure if I am missing the point, but of course, how else will you get instrumentation other than actually using the class? > So I don't think re-using a base class, and implementing an inheritance hierarchy avoids this. The suggestion was about reusing the existing pattern by making it more generic, instead of introducing a new class. If we keep adding new standalone classes for every new scenario, it can quickly get confusing. Also, the existing counter map based approach is easier to introspect and process. Just my 2ยข. > For the sake of discussion, I took a stab at what it would look if we did create this inheritance hierarchy. We can look at [this](https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/6623/commits/8a7a2df204eb259bd809bb494c4a099930886ca8) commit to compare both implementations Looks good, but I would rename `ServerSideMetricsCounter` as just `MetricsCounter` (or `MetricsBase`) as there is nothing server specific in it. Also, it is not the right place to have those public static constants as it is independent of any specific metric. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
