HBase
  1. HBase
  2. HBASE-10970

[AccessController] Issues with covering cell permission checks

    Details

    • Type: Bug Bug
    • Status: Closed
    • Priority: Major Major
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Affects Version/s: 0.98.0
    • Fix Version/s: 0.99.0, 0.98.2
    • Component/s: None
    • Labels:
      None
    • Hadoop Flags:
      Reviewed

      Description

      Refer to discussion in HBASE-10823.

      The exact version deletion also check for the preceeding version though the latest version allows the permission

      This solves the problems
      1. Exact version delete checks only the relevant cell version permission (not all versions under this)
      2. When Put/Delete contains individual cell TS, this check cell permissions for only relevant covering cell(s) under that specified TS (in Mutation KV)

      1. HBASE-10970.patch
        35 kB
        Anoop Sam John
      2. HBASE-10970_V3.patch
        37 kB
        Anoop Sam John
      3. HBASE-10970_V2.patch
        37 kB
        Anoop Sam John
      4. 10970-0.98.addendum
        0.7 kB
        Ted Yu

        Issue Links

          Activity

          Hide
          Andrew Purtell added a comment -

          This issue doesn't say what the objective is nor the approach. I think the scope as described is too narrow.

          Show
          Andrew Purtell added a comment - This issue doesn't say what the objective is nor the approach. I think the scope as described is too narrow.
          Hide
          Andrew Purtell added a comment -

          For example, compare this issue with the comment here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10823?focusedCommentId=13967594&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13967594

          IMO, the title of this JIRA needs to change, and it should be about pursuing alternative #1 of that comment from HBASE-10823.

          Show
          Andrew Purtell added a comment - For example, compare this issue with the comment here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10823?focusedCommentId=13967594&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13967594 IMO, the title of this JIRA needs to change, and it should be about pursuing alternative #1 of that comment from HBASE-10823 .
          Hide
          ramkrishna.s.vasudevan added a comment -

          Andrew Purtell
          This JIRA i raised to address only the part which says we should consider only latest version if the delete issued is a specific version delete. Hence the title.

          Show
          ramkrishna.s.vasudevan added a comment - Andrew Purtell This JIRA i raised to address only the part which says we should consider only latest version if the delete issued is a specific version delete. Hence the title.
          Hide
          Andrew Purtell added a comment -

          Why not one fix to take care of the remaining corner cases instead of one fix for one corner case?

          Show
          Andrew Purtell added a comment - Why not one fix to take care of the remaining corner cases instead of one fix for one corner case?
          Hide
          ramkrishna.s.vasudevan added a comment -

          Why not one fix to take care of the remaining corner cases instead of one fix for one corner case?

          Ok fine. I was thinking we could handle this case separately as this is concerned with delete with specific version.

          Show
          ramkrishna.s.vasudevan added a comment - Why not one fix to take care of the remaining corner cases instead of one fix for one corner case? Ok fine. I was thinking we could handle this case separately as this is concerned with delete with specific version.
          Hide
          Anoop Sam John added a comment -

          This solves the problems like
          1. Exact version delete checks only the relevant cell version permission
          2. When Put/Delete contains individual cell TS, this check cell permissions for only relevant covering cell(s) under that specified TS (in Mutation KV)

          Show
          Anoop Sam John added a comment - This solves the problems like 1. Exact version delete checks only the relevant cell version permission 2. When Put/Delete contains individual cell TS, this check cell permissions for only relevant covering cell(s) under that specified TS (in Mutation KV)
          Hide
          Hadoop QA added a comment -

          +1 overall. Here are the results of testing the latest attachment
          http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12641215/HBASE-10970.patch
          against trunk revision .
          ATTACHMENT ID: 12641215

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

          +1 tests included. The patch appears to include 6 new or modified tests.

          +1 javadoc. The javadoc tool did not generate any warning messages.

          +1 javac. The applied patch does not increase the total number of javac compiler warnings.

          +1 findbugs. The patch does not introduce any new Findbugs (version 1.3.9) warnings.

          +1 release audit. The applied patch does not increase the total number of release audit warnings.

          +1 lineLengths. The patch does not introduce lines longer than 100

          +1 site. The mvn site goal succeeds with this patch.

          +1 core tests. The patch passed unit tests in .

          Test results: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9359//testReport/
          Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9359//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-protocol.html
          Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9359//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-thrift.html
          Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9359//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-client.html
          Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9359//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-hadoop2-compat.html
          Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9359//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-examples.html
          Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9359//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-prefix-tree.html
          Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9359//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-common.html
          Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9359//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-server.html
          Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9359//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-hadoop-compat.html
          Console output: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9359//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/12641215/HBASE-10970.patch against trunk revision . ATTACHMENT ID: 12641215 +1 @author . The patch does not contain any @author tags. +1 tests included . The patch appears to include 6 new or modified tests. +1 javadoc . The javadoc tool did not generate any warning messages. +1 javac . The applied patch does not increase the total number of javac compiler warnings. +1 findbugs . The patch does not introduce any new Findbugs (version 1.3.9) warnings. +1 release audit . The applied patch does not increase the total number of release audit warnings. +1 lineLengths . The patch does not introduce lines longer than 100 +1 site . The mvn site goal succeeds with this patch. +1 core tests . The patch passed unit tests in . Test results: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9359//testReport/ Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9359//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-protocol.html Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9359//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-thrift.html Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9359//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-client.html Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9359//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-hadoop2-compat.html Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9359//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-examples.html Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9359//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-prefix-tree.html Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9359//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-common.html Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9359//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-server.html Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9359//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-hadoop-compat.html Console output: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9359//console This message is automatically generated.
          Hide
          Andrew Purtell added a comment -

          Ok well consensus seems to be do it this way. As long as we only issue a single Get to perform the covering check (which is the case here). If ever we can't this logic can be moved into a filter.

          An improvement judging by the test updates.

          +1

          Show
          Andrew Purtell added a comment - Ok well consensus seems to be do it this way. As long as we only issue a single Get to perform the covering check (which is the case here). If ever we can't this logic can be moved into a filter. An improvement judging by the test updates. +1
          Hide
          ramkrishna.s.vasudevan added a comment -

          I went thro the patch. We will do gets for all the versions in case of Puts and deletes because we are not sure what are the types of deletes inside.

           if ((col.getQualifierLength() == 0 && request == OpType.DELETE)
                                || CellUtil.matchingQualifier(cell, col)) {
          

          May be we can refactor this to if/else where if deals with DELETE type and else with Put. Any way we have considerCellTs which is common in both these cases. or may be under
          if (consdierCellTs) do the if/else check.
          But I still feel atleast for Put doing get with max versions and then checking for the change of col/family is bit overkill when the system has lot of versions.

          Show
          ramkrishna.s.vasudevan added a comment - I went thro the patch. We will do gets for all the versions in case of Puts and deletes because we are not sure what are the types of deletes inside. if ((col.getQualifierLength() == 0 && request == OpType.DELETE) || CellUtil.matchingQualifier(cell, col)) { May be we can refactor this to if/else where if deals with DELETE type and else with Put. Any way we have considerCellTs which is common in both these cases. or may be under if (consdierCellTs) do the if/else check. But I still feel atleast for Put doing get with max versions and then checking for the change of col/family is bit overkill when the system has lot of versions.
          Hide
          Anoop Sam John added a comment - - edited

          But I still feel atleast for Put doing get with max versions and then checking for the change of col/family is bit overkill when the system has lot of versions.

          We get until a match happens. Not all the versions always. The TR for the Get is 0-maxTS . So I dont think set maxVersion(1) will make a diff.

          May be we can refactor this to if/else where if deals with DELETE type and else with Put.

          For Delete case also CellUtil.matchingQualifier check should be there.
          col.getQualifierLength() == 0 && request == OpType.DELETE -> This is a special case handling with delete CF. So not getting what is the adv with any such refactor.

          Show
          Anoop Sam John added a comment - - edited But I still feel atleast for Put doing get with max versions and then checking for the change of col/family is bit overkill when the system has lot of versions. We get until a match happens. Not all the versions always. The TR for the Get is 0-maxTS . So I dont think set maxVersion(1) will make a diff. May be we can refactor this to if/else where if deals with DELETE type and else with Put. For Delete case also CellUtil.matchingQualifier check should be there. col.getQualifierLength() == 0 && request == OpType.DELETE -> This is a special case handling with delete CF. So not getting what is the adv with any such refactor.
          Hide
          ramkrishna.s.vasudevan added a comment -

          This is a special case handling with delete CF. So not getting what is the adv with any such refactor.

          Code readability would be better.

          So I dont think set maxVersion(1) will make a diff.

          I may be wrong here, not sure why you say so.
          What i felt is with maxVersions as 1 internally the scan code may do seek to the next Col once the required columns first Cell is retrieved. But here we may have to check and keep doing next and also match for the qualifier. For Put it may not be really needed I thought.

          Show
          ramkrishna.s.vasudevan added a comment - This is a special case handling with delete CF. So not getting what is the adv with any such refactor. Code readability would be better. So I dont think set maxVersion(1) will make a diff. I may be wrong here, not sure why you say so. What i felt is with maxVersions as 1 internally the scan code may do seek to the next Col once the required columns first Cell is retrieved. But here we may have to check and keep doing next and also match for the qualifier. For Put it may not be really needed I thought.
          Hide
          Anoop Sam John added a comment -

          For Put it may not be really needed I thought.

          Pls see the test case testCellPermissionsForPutWithMultipleVersions

          Show
          Anoop Sam John added a comment - For Put it may not be really needed I thought. Pls see the test case testCellPermissionsForPutWithMultipleVersions
          Hide
          Anoop Sam John added a comment - - edited

          Understood ur concern on the max versions setting. But if we have to handle the Put with KV TS, we have to find exact covering cell. What do u say? When there are very less no# versions for a cell, the perf penalty may not be that much.

          Show
          Anoop Sam John added a comment - - edited Understood ur concern on the max versions setting. But if we have to handle the Put with KV TS, we have to find exact covering cell. What do u say? When there are very less no# versions for a cell, the perf penalty may not be that much.
          Hide
          Anoop Sam John added a comment -

          There is one optimization possible , with a common case of Put. Will give an updated patch with that soon.

          Show
          Anoop Sam John added a comment - There is one optimization possible , with a common case of Put. Will give an updated patch with that soon.
          Hide
          Andrew Purtell added a comment -

          Made another pass over this. Still looks like an improvement so I am still +1. One minor question:

          +      Map<ByteRange, Object> familyMap1 = new HashMap<ByteRange, Object>();
          

          and below the code only considers List. So why not just use List here?

          Show
          Andrew Purtell added a comment - Made another pass over this. Still looks like an improvement so I am still +1. One minor question: + Map<ByteRange, Object > familyMap1 = new HashMap<ByteRange, Object >(); and below the code only considers List. So why not just use List here?
          Hide
          Anoop Sam John added a comment -

          So why not just use List here?

          Sure can change.

          Show
          Anoop Sam John added a comment - So why not just use List here? Sure can change.
          Hide
          Anoop Sam John added a comment -

          Addressing Andy's comment

          Show
          Anoop Sam John added a comment - Addressing Andy's comment
          Hide
          Andrew Purtell added a comment -

          +1

          Show
          Andrew Purtell added a comment - +1
          Hide
          Hadoop QA added a comment -

          +1 overall. Here are the results of testing the latest attachment
          http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12641515/HBASE-10970_V3.patch
          against trunk revision .
          ATTACHMENT ID: 12641515

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

          +1 tests included. The patch appears to include 6 new or modified tests.

          +1 javadoc. The javadoc tool did not generate any warning messages.

          +1 javac. The applied patch does not increase the total number of javac compiler warnings.

          +1 findbugs. The patch does not introduce any new Findbugs (version 1.3.9) warnings.

          +1 release audit. The applied patch does not increase the total number of release audit warnings.

          +1 lineLengths. The patch does not introduce lines longer than 100

          +1 site. The mvn site goal succeeds with this patch.

          +1 core tests. The patch passed unit tests in .

          Test results: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9376//testReport/
          Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9376//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-protocol.html
          Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9376//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-thrift.html
          Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9376//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-client.html
          Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9376//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-hadoop2-compat.html
          Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9376//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-examples.html
          Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9376//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-prefix-tree.html
          Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9376//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-common.html
          Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9376//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-server.html
          Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9376//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-hadoop-compat.html
          Console output: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9376//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/12641515/HBASE-10970_V3.patch against trunk revision . ATTACHMENT ID: 12641515 +1 @author . The patch does not contain any @author tags. +1 tests included . The patch appears to include 6 new or modified tests. +1 javadoc . The javadoc tool did not generate any warning messages. +1 javac . The applied patch does not increase the total number of javac compiler warnings. +1 findbugs . The patch does not introduce any new Findbugs (version 1.3.9) warnings. +1 release audit . The applied patch does not increase the total number of release audit warnings. +1 lineLengths . The patch does not introduce lines longer than 100 +1 site . The mvn site goal succeeds with this patch. +1 core tests . The patch passed unit tests in . Test results: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9376//testReport/ Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9376//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-protocol.html Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9376//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-thrift.html Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9376//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-client.html Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9376//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-hadoop2-compat.html Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9376//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-examples.html Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9376//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-prefix-tree.html Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9376//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-common.html Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9376//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-server.html Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9376//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-hadoop-compat.html Console output: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9376//console This message is automatically generated.
          Hide
          ramkrishna.s.vasudevan added a comment -

          +1 on v3.

          Show
          ramkrishna.s.vasudevan added a comment - +1 on v3.
          Hide
          Anoop Sam John added a comment -

          Committed to 0.98 and Trunk. Thanks for the reviews Ram and Andy.

          Show
          Anoop Sam John added a comment - Committed to 0.98 and Trunk. Thanks for the reviews Ram and Andy.
          Hide
          Hudson added a comment -

          FAILURE: Integrated in HBase-0.98-on-Hadoop-1.1 #277 (See https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase-0.98-on-Hadoop-1.1/277/)
          HBASE-10970 [AccessController] Issues with covering cell permission checks. (Anoop) (anoopsamjohn: rev 1589594)

          • /hbase/branches/0.98/hbase-server/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/AccessController.java
          • /hbase/branches/0.98/hbase-server/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/SecureTestUtil.java
          • /hbase/branches/0.98/hbase-server/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/TestCellACLWithMultipleVersions.java
          Show
          Hudson added a comment - FAILURE: Integrated in HBase-0.98-on-Hadoop-1.1 #277 (See https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase-0.98-on-Hadoop-1.1/277/ ) HBASE-10970 [AccessController] Issues with covering cell permission checks. (Anoop) (anoopsamjohn: rev 1589594) /hbase/branches/0.98/hbase-server/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/AccessController.java /hbase/branches/0.98/hbase-server/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/SecureTestUtil.java /hbase/branches/0.98/hbase-server/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/TestCellACLWithMultipleVersions.java
          Hide
          Hudson added a comment -

          FAILURE: Integrated in HBase-0.98 #292 (See https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase-0.98/292/)
          HBASE-10970 [AccessController] Issues with covering cell permission checks. (Anoop) (anoopsamjohn: rev 1589594)

          • /hbase/branches/0.98/hbase-server/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/AccessController.java
          • /hbase/branches/0.98/hbase-server/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/SecureTestUtil.java
          • /hbase/branches/0.98/hbase-server/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/TestCellACLWithMultipleVersions.java
          Show
          Hudson added a comment - FAILURE: Integrated in HBase-0.98 #292 (See https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase-0.98/292/ ) HBASE-10970 [AccessController] Issues with covering cell permission checks. (Anoop) (anoopsamjohn: rev 1589594) /hbase/branches/0.98/hbase-server/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/AccessController.java /hbase/branches/0.98/hbase-server/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/SecureTestUtil.java /hbase/branches/0.98/hbase-server/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/TestCellACLWithMultipleVersions.java
          Hide
          Hudson added a comment -

          SUCCESS: Integrated in HBase-TRUNK #5112 (See https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase-TRUNK/5112/)
          HBASE-10970 [AccessController] Issues with covering cell permission checks. (Anoop) (anoopsamjohn: rev 1589593)

          • /hbase/trunk/hbase-server/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/AccessController.java
          • /hbase/trunk/hbase-server/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/SecureTestUtil.java
          • /hbase/trunk/hbase-server/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/TestCellACLWithMultipleVersions.java
          Show
          Hudson added a comment - SUCCESS: Integrated in HBase-TRUNK #5112 (See https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase-TRUNK/5112/ ) HBASE-10970 [AccessController] Issues with covering cell permission checks. (Anoop) (anoopsamjohn: rev 1589593) /hbase/trunk/hbase-server/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/AccessController.java /hbase/trunk/hbase-server/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/SecureTestUtil.java /hbase/trunk/hbase-server/src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/security/access/TestCellACLWithMultipleVersions.java
          Hide
          Ted Yu added a comment -

          Addendum that fixes 0.98 build

          Show
          Ted Yu added a comment - Addendum that fixes 0.98 build
          Hide
          ramkrishna.s.vasudevan added a comment -

          Is this method matchingColumn() not available in 0.98? I think I committed this as part of the Cell work? Any way +1 if it is missing.

          Show
          ramkrishna.s.vasudevan added a comment - Is this method matchingColumn() not available in 0.98? I think I committed this as part of the Cell work? Any way +1 if it is missing.
          Hide
          Ted Yu added a comment -

          None of the matchingColumn() methods was available prior to the addendum.

          Integrated addendum to 0.98

          Show
          Ted Yu added a comment - None of the matchingColumn() methods was available prior to the addendum. Integrated addendum to 0.98
          Hide
          ramkrishna.s.vasudevan added a comment -

          Yes Ted. Cell work is targeted for trunk only. Thanks Ted for the heads up.

          Show
          ramkrishna.s.vasudevan added a comment - Yes Ted. Cell work is targeted for trunk only. Thanks Ted for the heads up.
          Hide
          Hudson added a comment -

          FAILURE: Integrated in HBase-0.98 #293 (See https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase-0.98/293/)
          HBASE-10970 [AccessController] Issues with covering cell permission checks - addendum (tedyu: rev 1589781)

          • /hbase/branches/0.98/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/CellUtil.java
          Show
          Hudson added a comment - FAILURE: Integrated in HBase-0.98 #293 (See https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase-0.98/293/ ) HBASE-10970 [AccessController] Issues with covering cell permission checks - addendum (tedyu: rev 1589781) /hbase/branches/0.98/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/CellUtil.java
          Hide
          Hudson added a comment -

          FAILURE: Integrated in HBase-0.98-on-Hadoop-1.1 #278 (See https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase-0.98-on-Hadoop-1.1/278/)
          HBASE-10970 [AccessController] Issues with covering cell permission checks - addendum (tedyu: rev 1589781)

          • /hbase/branches/0.98/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/CellUtil.java
          Show
          Hudson added a comment - FAILURE: Integrated in HBase-0.98-on-Hadoop-1.1 #278 (See https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase-0.98-on-Hadoop-1.1/278/ ) HBASE-10970 [AccessController] Issues with covering cell permission checks - addendum (tedyu: rev 1589781) /hbase/branches/0.98/hbase-common/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/CellUtil.java
          Hide
          Anoop Sam John added a comment -

          Oh I was also with the impression that Ram's patch went into 98 as well. Thanks for addendum Ted.

          Show
          Anoop Sam John added a comment - Oh I was also with the impression that Ram's patch went into 98 as well. Thanks for addendum Ted.
          Hide
          Enis Soztutar added a comment -

          Closing this issue after 0.99.0 release.

          Show
          Enis Soztutar added a comment - Closing this issue after 0.99.0 release.

            People

            • Assignee:
              Anoop Sam John
              Reporter:
              ramkrishna.s.vasudevan
            • Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              8 Start watching this issue

              Dates

              • Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved:

                Development