Details

    • Type: Improvement Improvement
    • Status: Patch Available
    • Priority: Minor Minor
    • Resolution: Unresolved
    • Affects Version/s: 0.94.18
    • Fix Version/s: None
    • Component/s: None
    • Labels:
      None

      Description

        Activity

        Hide
        stack added a comment -

        You fellows run into this Liu Shaohui? Go for it.

        Show
        stack added a comment - You fellows run into this Liu Shaohui ? Go for it.
        Hide
        Liu Shaohui added a comment -

        Lars Hofhansl
        What's your suggestion about this patch?

        Show
        Liu Shaohui added a comment - Lars Hofhansl What's your suggestion about this patch?
        Hide
        Hadoop QA added a comment -

        -1 overall. Here are the results of testing the latest attachment
        http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12639555/HBASE-10943-0.94-v1.diff
        against trunk revision .
        ATTACHMENT ID: 12639555

        +1 @author. The patch does not contain any @author tags.

        +1 tests included. The patch appears to include 14 new or modified tests.

        -1 patch. The patch command could not apply the patch.

        Console output: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9245//console

        This message is automatically generated.

        Show
        Hadoop QA added a comment - -1 overall . Here are the results of testing the latest attachment http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12639555/HBASE-10943-0.94-v1.diff against trunk revision . ATTACHMENT ID: 12639555 +1 @author . The patch does not contain any @author tags. +1 tests included . The patch appears to include 14 new or modified tests. -1 patch . The patch command could not apply the patch. Console output: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9245//console This message is automatically generated.
        Hide
        Lars Hofhansl added a comment -

        So this is a pretty radical change for 0.94, I think.

        Liu Shaohui do you absolutely need this in 0.94?
        Are we 100% that does not introduce any compatibility issues for rolling upgrades (i.e. some servers running old cold, some the new)?

        My gut feeling here is not to do this in 0.94.

        Show
        Lars Hofhansl added a comment - So this is a pretty radical change for 0.94, I think. Liu Shaohui do you absolutely need this in 0.94? Are we 100% that does not introduce any compatibility issues for rolling upgrades (i.e. some servers running old cold, some the new)? My gut feeling here is not to do this in 0.94.
        Hide
        Liu Shaohui added a comment -

        Lars Hofhansl
        According the discussion in HBASE-6980, the flush marker is not necessary now and removing flush marker will not introduce any compatibility issues.

        The main changes in HBASE-7329 is:
        a, remove the flush marker in completeCacheFlush
        b, bring a oldestSeqNumsLock to protect lastSeqWritten and make locking more granular

        I think this issue is depended on HBASE-8752. And parallel region flush be benefit to write heavy workload.

        Show
        Liu Shaohui added a comment - Lars Hofhansl According the discussion in HBASE-6980 , the flush marker is not necessary now and removing flush marker will not introduce any compatibility issues. The main changes in HBASE-7329 is: a, remove the flush marker in completeCacheFlush b, bring a oldestSeqNumsLock to protect lastSeqWritten and make locking more granular I think this issue is depended on HBASE-8752 . And parallel region flush be benefit to write heavy workload.

          People

          • Assignee:
            Liu Shaohui
            Reporter:
            Liu Shaohui
          • Votes:
            0 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            4 Start watching this issue

            Dates

            • Created:
              Updated:

              Development