You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to issues@hbase.apache.org by "Enis Soztutar (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2014/09/09 05:14:30 UTC
[jira] [Updated] (HBASE-10602) Cleanup HTable public interface
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10602?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Enis Soztutar updated HBASE-10602:
----------------------------------
Issue Type: Umbrella (was: Improvement)
> Cleanup HTable public interface
> -------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-10602
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10602
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Umbrella
> Components: Client, Usability
> Reporter: Nick Dimiduk
> Assignee: Enis Soztutar
> Priority: Blocker
> Fix For: 0.99.1
>
> Attachments: hbase-10602_v1.patch
>
>
> HBASE-6580 replaced the preferred means of HTableInterface acquisition to the HConnection#getTable factory methods. HBASE-9117 removes the HConnection cache, placing the burden of responsible connection cleanup on whomever acquires it.
> The remaining HTable constructors use a Connection instance and manage their own HConnection on the callers behalf. This is convenient but also a surprising source of poor performance for anyone accustomed to the previous connection caching behavior. I propose deprecating those remaining constructors for 0.98/0.96 and removing them for 1.0.
> While I'm at it, I suggest we pursue some API hygiene in general and convert HTable into an interface. I'm sure there are method overloads for accepting String/byte[]/TableName where just TableName is sufficient. Can that be done for 1.0 as well?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)