+1. Not just for Typesafe Config, but if we want to consider hierarchical configs like JSON rather than flat key mappings, it is necessary. It is also clearer.
On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Aaron Davidson <ilike...@gmail.com> wrote: > Should we try to deprecate these types of configs for 1.0.0? We can start > by accepting both and giving a warning if you use the old one, and then > actually remove them in the next minor release. I think > "spark.speculation.enabled=true" is better than "spark.speculation=true", > and if we decide to use typesafe configs again ourselves, this change is > necessary. > > We actually don't have to ever complete the deprecation - we can always > accept both spark.speculation and spark.speculation.enabled, and people > just have to use the latter if they want to use typesafe config. > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 9:24 AM, Mark Hamstra <m...@clearstorydata.com>wrote: > >> That's the whole reason why some of the intended configuration changes >> were backed out just before the 0.9.0 release. It's a well-known issue, >> even if a completely satisfactory solution isn't as well-known and is >> probably something which should do another iteration on. >> >> >> On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 9:10 AM, Koert Kuipers <ko...@tresata.com> wrote: >> >>> i am reading the spark configuration params from another configuration >>> object (typesafe config) before setting them as system properties. >>> >>> i noticed typesafe config has trouble with settings like: >>> spark.speculation=true >>> spark.speculation.interval=0.5 >>> >>> the issue seems to be that if spark.speculation is a "container" that has >>> more values inside then it cannot be also a value itself, i think. so this >>> would work fine: >>> spark.speculation.enabled=true >>> spark.speculation.interval=0.5 >>> >>> just a heads up. i would probably suggest we avoid this situation. >>> >> >> -- -- Evan Chan Staff Engineer e...@ooyala.com |
