Skip to content

[ZEPPELIN-6406] Integrate interpreter config key constants#5184

Open
hyunw9 wants to merge 2 commits intoapache:masterfrom
hyunw9:ZEPPELIN-6406
Open

[ZEPPELIN-6406] Integrate interpreter config key constants#5184
hyunw9 wants to merge 2 commits intoapache:masterfrom
hyunw9:ZEPPELIN-6406

Conversation

@hyunw9
Copy link
Contributor

@hyunw9 hyunw9 commented Mar 17, 2026

What is this PR for?

Upstream issue ZEPPELIN-6400 removed the ZeppleinConfiguration dependency from the zeppelin-interpreter module and replaced it with a plain property-based approach.

As a subtask, fix these problems

Config key String (e.g. "zeppelin.interpreter.connection.poolsize") are hardcoded as plain string in RemoteInterpreterServer.java, TimeoutLifecycleManager.java, and SchedulerFactory.java. so typos can only be caught at runtime.
The same keys are defined independently in ZeppelinConfiguration.ConfVars, creating drift risk between two modules.
TimeoutLifecycleManager.parseTimeValue() duplicates the logic of ZeppelinConfiguration.timeUnitToMill().

What type of PR is it?

Refactoring

Todos

  • - Add a few files in zeppelin-common to remove hardcoded properties
  • - Replace String config variables with using added common property InterpreterConfigKeys in zeppelin-common module
  • - Mark timeUnitToMill() @Deprecated and delegated to ConfigTimeUtils in zeppelin-common module

What is the Jira issue?

How should this be tested?

  • Simple property tests are added under zeppelin-common module(InterreterConfigKeysTest.java, ConfigTimeUtilsTest.java)

Questions:

  • Does the license files need to update? - No
  • Is there breaking changes for older versions? - No
  • Does this needs documentation? - No

jongyoul
jongyoul previously approved these changes Mar 21, 2026
Copy link
Member

@jongyoul jongyoul left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think it's a good starting point. Thank you.

@jongyoul
Copy link
Member

jongyoul commented Mar 21, 2026

@hyunw9 By the way, could you please handle npm-audit issue first with another PR if possible?

Copy link
Contributor

@Reamer Reamer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please remove the unnecessary test class. Everything else looks great.

@hyunw9
Copy link
Contributor Author

hyunw9 commented Mar 21, 2026

@jongyoul @hyunw9 By the way, could you please handle npm-audit issue first with another PR if possible?

Sure, I’ll open a new issue and work on resolving it there.

Sign up for free to 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