You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@hive.apache.org by Shushant Arora <sh...@gmail.com> on 2014/09/20 14:39:19 UTC
bug in hive
Hive version 0.9 and later has a bug
While inserting in a hive table Hive takes an exclusive lock. But if table
is partitioned , and insert is in dynamic partition , it will take shared
lock on table but if all partitions are static then hive takes exclusive
lock on partitions in which data is being inserted
and shared lock on table.
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-3509
1.What if I want to take exclusive lock on table while inserting in dynamic
partition ?
I tried to take explicit lock using :
LOCK TABLE tablename EXCLUSIVE;
But it made table to be disabled.
I cannot even read from table anymore even is same session until I do
unlock table tablename in another session;
2. moreover whats lock level in hive , I mean any user can remove any other
users lock. that too seems buggy.
Thanks
Shushant
Re: bug in hive
Posted by Shushant Arora <sh...@gmail.com>.
Hi Alan
1.When writer takes exclusive lock , hive won't allow to write anyone(even
the session which holds lock) to write in table.
Do I need to pass lock handle to read query or I am missing here something.
2.Or you mean to insert using hadoop filesystem not using hive ?
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 8:13 PM, Alan Gates <ga...@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> Shushant,
>
> Creating a patched jar that would include the lock functionality you want
> is unlikely to work. Wouldn't the following workflow work for you:
>
> 1. Writer locks the table explicitly via LOCK TABLE
> 2. Writer inserts
> 3. Writer unlocks the table explicitly via UNLOCK TABLE
>
> If you're using ZK for your locking I think the client dying (as opposed
> to ending the session) should cause the lock to expire. If not, you may
> have to assure the unlock happens in your application. Hope that helps.
>
> Alan.
>
> Shushant Arora <sh...@gmail.com>
> September 20, 2014 at 8:00
> Hi Alan
>
> I have 0.10 version of hive deployed in my org's cluster, I cannot update
> that because of org's policy.
> How can I achieve exclusive lock functionality while inserting in dynamic
> partition on hive 0.10 ?
> Does calling hive scripts via some sort of java api with patched jar
> included will help ?
> Moreover hive does not release locks in 0.10 when hive session is killed .
> User has to explicitly unlock a table.
> Can i specify any sort of max expiry time while taking a lock.
>
> Thanks
> Shushant
>
>
> Alan Gates <ga...@hortonworks.com>
> September 20, 2014 at 7:41
> Up until Hive 0.13 locks in Hive were really advisory only, since as you
> note any user can remove any other user's lock. In Hive 0.13 a new type of
> locking was introduced, see
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/Hive+Transactions#HiveTransactions-LockManager
> This new locking is automatic and ignores both LOCK and UNLOCK commands.
> Note that it is off by default, you have to configure Hive to use the new
> DbTxnManager to get turn on this locking. In 0.13 it still has the bug you
> describe as far as acquiring the wrong lock for dynamic partitioning, but I
> believe I've fixed that in 0.14.
>
> Alan.
>
>
> Shushant Arora <sh...@gmail.com>
> September 20, 2014 at 5:39
>
> Hive version 0.9 and later has a bug
>
>
>
> While inserting in a hive table Hive takes an exclusive lock. But if table
> is partitioned , and insert is in dynamic partition , it will take shared
> lock on table but if all partitions are static then hive takes exclusive
> lock on partitions in which data is being inserted
>
> and shared lock on table.
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-3509
>
>
> 1.What if I want to take exclusive lock on table while inserting in
> dynamic partition ?
>
>
> I tried to take explicit lock using :
>
> LOCK TABLE tablename EXCLUSIVE;
>
>
> But it made table to be disabled.
>
> I cannot even read from table anymore even is same session until I do
>
> unlock table tablename in another session;
>
>
> 2. moreover whats lock level in hive , I mean any user can remove any
> other users lock. that too seems buggy.
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Shushant
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent with Postbox <http://www.getpostbox.com>
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity
> to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately
> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
>
Re: bug in hive
Posted by Alan Gates <ga...@hortonworks.com>.
Shushant,
Creating a patched jar that would include the lock functionality you
want is unlikely to work. Wouldn't the following workflow work for you:
1. Writer locks the table explicitly via LOCK TABLE
2. Writer inserts
3. Writer unlocks the table explicitly via UNLOCK TABLE
If you're using ZK for your locking I think the client dying (as opposed
to ending the session) should cause the lock to expire. If not, you may
have to assure the unlock happens in your application. Hope that helps.
Alan.
> Shushant Arora <ma...@gmail.com>
> September 20, 2014 at 8:00
> Hi Alan
>
> I have 0.10 version of hive deployed in my org's cluster, I cannot
> update that because of org's policy.
> How can I achieve exclusive lock functionality while inserting in
> dynamic partition on hive 0.10 ?
> Does calling hive scripts via some sort of java api with patched jar
> included will help ?
> Moreover hive does not release locks in 0.10 when hive session is
> killed . User has to explicitly unlock a table.
> Can i specify any sort of max expiry time while taking a lock.
>
> Thanks
> Shushant
>
>
> Alan Gates <ma...@hortonworks.com>
> September 20, 2014 at 7:41
> Up until Hive 0.13 locks in Hive were really advisory only, since as
> you note any user can remove any other user's lock. In Hive 0.13 a
> new type of locking was introduced, see
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/Hive+Transactions#HiveTransactions-LockManager
> This new locking is automatic and ignores both LOCK and UNLOCK
> commands. Note that it is off by default, you have to configure Hive
> to use the new DbTxnManager to get turn on this locking. In 0.13 it
> still has the bug you describe as far as acquiring the wrong lock for
> dynamic partitioning, but I believe I've fixed that in 0.14.
>
> Alan.
>
>
> Shushant Arora <ma...@gmail.com>
> September 20, 2014 at 5:39
>
> Hive version 0.9 and later has a bug
>
> While inserting in a hive table Hive takes an exclusive lock. But if
> table is partitioned , and insert is in dynamic partition , it will
> take shared lock on table but if all partitions are static then hive
> takes exclusive lock on partitions in which data is being inserted
>
> and shared lock on table.
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-3509
>
>
> 1.What if I want to take exclusive lock on table while inserting in
> dynamic partition ?
>
>
> I tried to take explicit lock using :
>
> LOCK TABLE tablename EXCLUSIVE;
>
>
> But it made table to be disabled.
>
> I cannot even read from table anymore even is same session until I do
>
> unlock table tablename in another session;
>
>
> 2. moreover whats lock level in hive , I mean any user can remove any
> other users lock. that too seems buggy.
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Shushant
>
>
>
--
Sent with Postbox <http://www.getpostbox.com>
--
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately
and delete it from your system. Thank You.
Re: bug in hive
Posted by John Omernik <jo...@omernik.com>.
Shushant -
What I believe what Stephen is sarcastically trying to say is that some
organizational education may be in order here. Hive itself is not even at
version 1.0, those of us who use Hive in production know this, and have to
accept that there will be bugs like the one you are trying to address.
There MAY be a workaround, that takes more hours and introduces other bugs
into your environment, alternatively, taking the time to explain why moving
forward form Hive 0.10 to Hive 0.14 really is in the best interest of your
organization. Perhaps there can be a way where you can do a proof of
concept using Hive 0.14, i.e. copy the metastore to another SQL server, and
try moving the data the table to another location so you can prove out the
fix of your issue. Also, perhaps there can be a way to test the current
workflows that work on 0.10 in 0.14 so you can show that this change really
is right way to move.
Being at this level in an open source project has huge benefits, but
challenges as well. On one hand you can be much more nimble in your
environment because open source is fluid, but if you are trying to do this
within an environment that doesn't allow you to move like you need, it may
be losing a long term war while winning short term battles. I guess, what
I am saying is the similar to Stephen, but I highly recommend you work with
team that sets the policy and develop a new way to address how Hive and
other similar projects live within your change management policies. You
will benefit greatly in the long run.
John
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 1:26 AM, Shushant Arora <sh...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi Stephen
>
> We have cloudera setup deployed in our cluster, which we cannot update due
> to orgs policy.
> Till the time its not updated to version 0.14, How can I achieve the
> locking feature please suggest.
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 10:40 AM, Stephen Sprague <sp...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> great policy. install open source software that's not even version 1.0
>> into production and then not allow the ability to improve it (but of course
>> reap all the rewards of its benefits.) so instead of actually fixing the
>> problem the right way introduce a super-hack work-around cuz, you know,
>> that's much more "stable."
>>
>> Gotta luv it. Good luck.
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 8:00 AM, Shushant Arora <
>> shushantarora09@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Alan
>>>
>>> I have 0.10 version of hive deployed in my org's cluster, I cannot
>>> update that because of org's policy.
>>> How can I achieve exclusive lock functionality while inserting in
>>> dynamic partition on hive 0.10 ?
>>> Does calling hive scripts via some sort of java api with patched jar
>>> included will help ?
>>> Moreover hive does not release locks in 0.10 when hive session is killed
>>> . User has to explicitly unlock a table.
>>> Can i specify any sort of max expiry time while taking a lock.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Shushant
>>>
>>> On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 8:11 PM, Alan Gates <ga...@hortonworks.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Up until Hive 0.13 locks in Hive were really advisory only, since as
>>>> you note any user can remove any other user's lock. In Hive 0.13 a new
>>>> type of locking was introduced, see
>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/Hive+Transactions#HiveTransactions-LockManager
>>>> This new locking is automatic and ignores both LOCK and UNLOCK commands.
>>>> Note that it is off by default, you have to configure Hive to use the new
>>>> DbTxnManager to get turn on this locking. In 0.13 it still has the bug you
>>>> describe as far as acquiring the wrong lock for dynamic partitioning, but I
>>>> believe I've fixed that in 0.14.
>>>>
>>>> Alan.
>>>>
>>>> Shushant Arora <sh...@gmail.com>
>>>> September 20, 2014 at 5:39
>>>>
>>>> Hive version 0.9 and later has a bug
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> While inserting in a hive table Hive takes an exclusive lock. But if
>>>> table is partitioned , and insert is in dynamic partition , it will take
>>>> shared lock on table but if all partitions are static then hive takes
>>>> exclusive lock on partitions in which data is being inserted
>>>>
>>>> and shared lock on table.
>>>>
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-3509
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 1.What if I want to take exclusive lock on table while inserting in
>>>> dynamic partition ?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I tried to take explicit lock using :
>>>>
>>>> LOCK TABLE tablename EXCLUSIVE;
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But it made table to be disabled.
>>>>
>>>> I cannot even read from table anymore even is same session until I do
>>>>
>>>> unlock table tablename in another session;
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2. moreover whats lock level in hive , I mean any user can remove any
>>>> other users lock. that too seems buggy.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> Shushant
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Sent with Postbox <http://www.getpostbox.com>
>>>>
>>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
>>>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
>>>> entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is
>>>> confidential, privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law.
>>>> If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
>>>> notified that any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution,
>>>> disclosure or forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
>>>> you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender
>>>> immediately and delete it from your system. Thank You.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: bug in hive
Posted by Shushant Arora <sh...@gmail.com>.
Hi Stephen
We have cloudera setup deployed in our cluster, which we cannot update due
to orgs policy.
Till the time its not updated to version 0.14, How can I achieve the
locking feature please suggest.
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 10:40 AM, Stephen Sprague <sp...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> great policy. install open source software that's not even version 1.0
> into production and then not allow the ability to improve it (but of course
> reap all the rewards of its benefits.) so instead of actually fixing the
> problem the right way introduce a super-hack work-around cuz, you know,
> that's much more "stable."
>
> Gotta luv it. Good luck.
>
> On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 8:00 AM, Shushant Arora <shushantarora09@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>> Hi Alan
>>
>> I have 0.10 version of hive deployed in my org's cluster, I cannot update
>> that because of org's policy.
>> How can I achieve exclusive lock functionality while inserting in dynamic
>> partition on hive 0.10 ?
>> Does calling hive scripts via some sort of java api with patched jar
>> included will help ?
>> Moreover hive does not release locks in 0.10 when hive session is killed
>> . User has to explicitly unlock a table.
>> Can i specify any sort of max expiry time while taking a lock.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Shushant
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 8:11 PM, Alan Gates <ga...@hortonworks.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Up until Hive 0.13 locks in Hive were really advisory only, since as you
>>> note any user can remove any other user's lock. In Hive 0.13 a new type of
>>> locking was introduced, see
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/Hive+Transactions#HiveTransactions-LockManager
>>> This new locking is automatic and ignores both LOCK and UNLOCK commands.
>>> Note that it is off by default, you have to configure Hive to use the new
>>> DbTxnManager to get turn on this locking. In 0.13 it still has the bug you
>>> describe as far as acquiring the wrong lock for dynamic partitioning, but I
>>> believe I've fixed that in 0.14.
>>>
>>> Alan.
>>>
>>> Shushant Arora <sh...@gmail.com>
>>> September 20, 2014 at 5:39
>>>
>>> Hive version 0.9 and later has a bug
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> While inserting in a hive table Hive takes an exclusive lock. But if
>>> table is partitioned , and insert is in dynamic partition , it will take
>>> shared lock on table but if all partitions are static then hive takes
>>> exclusive lock on partitions in which data is being inserted
>>>
>>> and shared lock on table.
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-3509
>>>
>>>
>>> 1.What if I want to take exclusive lock on table while inserting in
>>> dynamic partition ?
>>>
>>>
>>> I tried to take explicit lock using :
>>>
>>> LOCK TABLE tablename EXCLUSIVE;
>>>
>>>
>>> But it made table to be disabled.
>>>
>>> I cannot even read from table anymore even is same session until I do
>>>
>>> unlock table tablename in another session;
>>>
>>>
>>> 2. moreover whats lock level in hive , I mean any user can remove any
>>> other users lock. that too seems buggy.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Shushant
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Sent with Postbox <http://www.getpostbox.com>
>>>
>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
>>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity
>>> to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
>>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
>>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
>>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
>>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
>>> received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately
>>> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
>>
>>
>>
>
Re: bug in hive
Posted by Stephen Sprague <sp...@gmail.com>.
great policy. install open source software that's not even version 1.0 into
production and then not allow the ability to improve it (but of course reap
all the rewards of its benefits.) so instead of actually fixing the
problem the right way introduce a super-hack work-around cuz, you know,
that's much more "stable."
Gotta luv it. Good luck.
On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 8:00 AM, Shushant Arora <sh...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi Alan
>
> I have 0.10 version of hive deployed in my org's cluster, I cannot update
> that because of org's policy.
> How can I achieve exclusive lock functionality while inserting in dynamic
> partition on hive 0.10 ?
> Does calling hive scripts via some sort of java api with patched jar
> included will help ?
> Moreover hive does not release locks in 0.10 when hive session is killed .
> User has to explicitly unlock a table.
> Can i specify any sort of max expiry time while taking a lock.
>
> Thanks
> Shushant
>
> On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 8:11 PM, Alan Gates <ga...@hortonworks.com> wrote:
>
>> Up until Hive 0.13 locks in Hive were really advisory only, since as you
>> note any user can remove any other user's lock. In Hive 0.13 a new type of
>> locking was introduced, see
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/Hive+Transactions#HiveTransactions-LockManager
>> This new locking is automatic and ignores both LOCK and UNLOCK commands.
>> Note that it is off by default, you have to configure Hive to use the new
>> DbTxnManager to get turn on this locking. In 0.13 it still has the bug you
>> describe as far as acquiring the wrong lock for dynamic partitioning, but I
>> believe I've fixed that in 0.14.
>>
>> Alan.
>>
>> Shushant Arora <sh...@gmail.com>
>> September 20, 2014 at 5:39
>>
>> Hive version 0.9 and later has a bug
>>
>>
>>
>> While inserting in a hive table Hive takes an exclusive lock. But if
>> table is partitioned , and insert is in dynamic partition , it will take
>> shared lock on table but if all partitions are static then hive takes
>> exclusive lock on partitions in which data is being inserted
>>
>> and shared lock on table.
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-3509
>>
>>
>> 1.What if I want to take exclusive lock on table while inserting in
>> dynamic partition ?
>>
>>
>> I tried to take explicit lock using :
>>
>> LOCK TABLE tablename EXCLUSIVE;
>>
>>
>> But it made table to be disabled.
>>
>> I cannot even read from table anymore even is same session until I do
>>
>> unlock table tablename in another session;
>>
>>
>> 2. moreover whats lock level in hive , I mean any user can remove any
>> other users lock. that too seems buggy.
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Shushant
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sent with Postbox <http://www.getpostbox.com>
>>
>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity
>> to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
>> received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately
>> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
>
>
>
Re: bug in hive
Posted by Shushant Arora <sh...@gmail.com>.
Hi Alan
I have 0.10 version of hive deployed in my org's cluster, I cannot update
that because of org's policy.
How can I achieve exclusive lock functionality while inserting in dynamic
partition on hive 0.10 ?
Does calling hive scripts via some sort of java api with patched jar
included will help ?
Moreover hive does not release locks in 0.10 when hive session is killed .
User has to explicitly unlock a table.
Can i specify any sort of max expiry time while taking a lock.
Thanks
Shushant
On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 8:11 PM, Alan Gates <ga...@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> Up until Hive 0.13 locks in Hive were really advisory only, since as you
> note any user can remove any other user's lock. In Hive 0.13 a new type of
> locking was introduced, see
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/Hive+Transactions#HiveTransactions-LockManager
> This new locking is automatic and ignores both LOCK and UNLOCK commands.
> Note that it is off by default, you have to configure Hive to use the new
> DbTxnManager to get turn on this locking. In 0.13 it still has the bug you
> describe as far as acquiring the wrong lock for dynamic partitioning, but I
> believe I've fixed that in 0.14.
>
> Alan.
>
> Shushant Arora <sh...@gmail.com>
> September 20, 2014 at 5:39
>
> Hive version 0.9 and later has a bug
>
>
>
> While inserting in a hive table Hive takes an exclusive lock. But if table
> is partitioned , and insert is in dynamic partition , it will take shared
> lock on table but if all partitions are static then hive takes exclusive
> lock on partitions in which data is being inserted
>
> and shared lock on table.
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-3509
>
>
> 1.What if I want to take exclusive lock on table while inserting in
> dynamic partition ?
>
>
> I tried to take explicit lock using :
>
> LOCK TABLE tablename EXCLUSIVE;
>
>
> But it made table to be disabled.
>
> I cannot even read from table anymore even is same session until I do
>
> unlock table tablename in another session;
>
>
> 2. moreover whats lock level in hive , I mean any user can remove any
> other users lock. that too seems buggy.
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Shushant
>
>
>
>
> --
> Sent with Postbox <http://www.getpostbox.com>
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity
> to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately
> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
Re: bug in hive
Posted by Alan Gates <ga...@hortonworks.com>.
Up until Hive 0.13 locks in Hive were really advisory only, since as you
note any user can remove any other user's lock. In Hive 0.13 a new type
of locking was introduced, see
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/Hive+Transactions#HiveTransactions-LockManager
This new locking is automatic and ignores both LOCK and UNLOCK
commands. Note that it is off by default, you have to configure Hive to
use the new DbTxnManager to get turn on this locking. In 0.13 it still
has the bug you describe as far as acquiring the wrong lock for dynamic
partitioning, but I believe I've fixed that in 0.14.
Alan.
> Shushant Arora <ma...@gmail.com>
> September 20, 2014 at 5:39
>
> Hive version 0.9 and later has a bug
>
> While inserting in a hive table Hive takes an exclusive lock. But if
> table is partitioned , and insert is in dynamic partition , it will
> take shared lock on table but if all partitions are static then hive
> takes exclusive lock on partitions in which data is being inserted
>
> and shared lock on table.
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-3509
>
>
> 1.What if I want to take exclusive lock on table while inserting in
> dynamic partition ?
>
>
> I tried to take explicit lock using :
>
> LOCK TABLE tablename EXCLUSIVE;
>
>
> But it made table to be disabled.
>
> I cannot even read from table anymore even is same session until I do
>
> unlock table tablename in another session;
>
>
> 2. moreover whats lock level in hive , I mean any user can remove any
> other users lock. that too seems buggy.
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Shushant
>
>
>
--
Sent with Postbox <http://www.getpostbox.com>
--
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to
which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately
and delete it from your system. Thank You.