You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@phoenix.apache.org by "Ohad Shacham (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2018/02/01 08:02:01 UTC
[jira] [Commented] (PHOENIX-4278) Implement pure client side
transactional index maintenance
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-4278?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16348158#comment-16348158 ]
Ohad Shacham commented on PHOENIX-4278:
---------------------------------------
[~jamestaylor], As per our discussion I applied the patch on-top-of of 4.x-HBase-1.3 and ran testing. It terminated with the same errors I received when running 4.x-HBase-1.3 without my patch.
This are the errors:
[*ERROR*] *Failures:*
[*ERROR*] *AggregateIT.testAvgGroupByOrderPreservingWithStats:432 expected:<13> but was:<8>*
[*INFO*]
[*ERROR*] *Tests run: 3365, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 7*
[*ERROR*] *Failures:*
[*ERROR*] *org.apache.phoenix.end2end.index.MutableIndexFailureIT.testIndexWriteFailure[MutableIndexFailureIT_transactional=false,localIndex=false,isNamespaceMapped=false,disableIndexOnWriteFailure=true,failRebuildTask=false,throwIndexWriteFailure=null](org.apache.phoenix.end2end.index.MutableIndexFailureIT)*
[*ERROR*] *Run 1: MutableIndexFailureIT.testIndexWriteFailure:345->checkStateAfterRebuild:389*
[*INFO*] *Run 2: PASS*
[*INFO*] *Run 3: PASS*
[*INFO*]
[*ERROR*] *PartialIndexRebuilderIT.testConcurrentUpsertsWithRebuild:221 Ran out of time*
[*ERROR*] *PartialIndexRebuilderIT.testMultiVersionsAfterFailure:461*
[*ERROR*] *PartialIndexRebuilderIT.testUpsertNullTwiceAfterFailure:521*
[*INFO*]
[*ERROR*] *Tests run: 600, Failures: 4, Errors: 0, Skipped: 44*
> Implement pure client side transactional index maintenance
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: PHOENIX-4278
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-4278
> Project: Phoenix
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: James Taylor
> Assignee: Ohad Shacham
> Priority: Major
>
> The index maintenance for transactions follows the same model as non transactional tables - coprocessor based on data table updates that looks up previous row value to perform maintenance. This is necessary for non transactional tables to ensure the rows are locked so that a consistent view may be obtained. However, for transactional tables, the time stamp oracle ensures uniqueness of time stamps (via transaction IDs) and the filtering handles a scan seeing the "true" last committed value for a row. Thus, there's no hard dependency to perform this on the server side.
> Moving the index maintenance to the client side would prevent any RS->RS RPC calls (which have proved to be troublesome for HBase). It would require returning more data to the client (i.e. the prior row value), but this seems like a reasonable tradeoff.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)