You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@hbase.apache.org by "cuijianwei (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2015/09/10 15:01:46 UTC

[jira] [Created] (HBASE-14397) PrefixFilter fail to filter all remainings if the prefix is longer than compared rowkey

cuijianwei created HBASE-14397:
----------------------------------

             Summary: PrefixFilter fail to filter all remainings if the prefix is longer than compared rowkey
                 Key: HBASE-14397
                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-14397
             Project: HBase
          Issue Type: Improvement
          Components: Filters
    Affects Versions: 2.0.0
            Reporter: cuijianwei
            Priority: Minor


The PrefixFilter will filter rowkey as:
{code}
  public boolean filterRowKey(Cell firstRowCell) {
    ...
    int length = firstRowCell.getRowLength();
    if (length < prefix.length) return true; // ===> return directly if the prefix is longer
    ....
    if ((!isReversed() && cmp > 0) || (isReversed() && cmp < 0)) {
      passedPrefix = true;
    }
    filterRow = (cmp != 0);
    return filterRow;
  }
{code}
If the prefix is longer than the current rowkey, PrefixFilter#filterRowKey will filter the rowkey directly without comparing, so that won't set 'passedPrefix' flag even the current row is larger than the prefix.
For example, if there are three rows 'a', 'b' and 'c' in the table, and we issue a scan request as:
{code}
hbase(main):001:0> scan 'test_table', {STARTROW => 'a', FILTER => "(PrefixFilter ('aa'))"}
{code}
The region server will check the three rows before returning.  In our production, the user issue a scan with a PrefixFilter. The prefix is longer than the rowkeys of following millions of rows, so the region server will continue to check rows until hit a rowkey longer than the prefix. This make the client easily timeout. To fix this case, it seems we need to compare the prefix with the rowkey even when the prefix is longer.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)