Skip to content

[ZEPPELIN-1706] Make spark Ui accesible in various interpreter modes - #1678

Closed
karuppayya wants to merge 10 commits into
apache:masterfrom
karuppayya:ZEPPELIN-1706
Closed

[ZEPPELIN-1706] Make spark Ui accesible in various interpreter modes#1678
karuppayya wants to merge 10 commits into
apache:masterfrom
karuppayya:ZEPPELIN-1706

Conversation

@karuppayya

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What is this PR for?

Spark UI should be accessible in various other modes(user, note) and honour the properties of the corresponding mode.
Example: In per user mode isolated mode, each logged in user should be taken to his/her respective spark UI
In per note isolated mode, each notebook will have its own application and the user should be taken the respective spark application UI
All the interpreter modes are handled with this PR

What type of PR is it?

Bug fix

What is the Jira issue?

ZEPPELIN-1706

How should this be tested?

Set various interpreter modes for the interpreter setting and test if the spark Application UI is accessible appropriately

Screenshots (if appropriate)

zep-1702

The screen capture shows per note isolated mode. But the PR handles all interpreter modes

Questions:

  • Does the licenses files need update?
  • Is there breaking changes for older versions?
  • Does this needs documentation?

@karuppayya

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

@Leemoonsoo@zjffdu Ready for review

* get the metainfo property value
*/
@GET
@POST

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why this is changed to POST ?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I wanted to send more amount of parameter data , hence started using POST
https://github.com/apache/zeppelin/pull/1678/files/6ec58e8ebf2493e5f417d5ee3c352ab3c4c793bd#diff-79927cd87b606e2efc3267cf436aa704R643
Also read this in one of the posts.

an important consideration when using GET for AJAX requests is that some browsers - IE in particular - will cache the results of a GET request

Not very sure if its applicable.
One another reason is to keep the url cleaner :)

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

POST is for request that would make state changes on server side, GET is just for read-only operation. IIUC this api didn't change anything in server side, then we should use GET.

Signed-off-by: karuppayya <karuppayya1990@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: karuppayya <karuppayya1990@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: karuppayya <karuppayya1990@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: karuppayya <karuppayya1990@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: karuppayya <karuppayya1990@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: karuppayya <karuppayya1990@gmail.com>
@karuppayya

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

@zjffdu I have addressed the feedbacks .

@karuppayya

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

@Leemoonsoo@zjffdu can u please take a look.and let me know how it looks

Comment threadzeppelin-web/pom.xml
<configuration>
<nodeVersion>${node.version}</nodeVersion>
<npmVersion>${npm.version}</npmVersion>
<nodeVersion>v6.9.1</nodeVersion>

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this change makes no sense in the scope of this PR

@zjffdu

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

ping @karuppayya

@asfgitasfgit closed this in c38a0a0May 9, 2018
asfgit pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 9, 2018
close#83close#86close#125close#133close#139close#146close#193close#203close#246close#262close#264close#273close#291close#299close#320close#347close#389close#413close#423close#543close#560close#658close#670close#728close#765close#777close#782close#783close#812close#822close#841close#843close#878close#884close#918close#989close#1076close#1135close#1187close#1231close#1304close#1316close#1361close#1385close#1390close#1414close#1422close#1425close#1447close#1458close#1466close#1485close#1492close#1495close#1497close#1536close#1545close#1561close#1577close#1600close#1603close#1678close#1695close#1739close#1748close#1765close#1767close#1776close#1783close#1799
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@karuppayya@zjffdu@RPCMoritz