[jira] [Commented] (PHOENIX-2591) Minimize transaction commit/rollback for DDL

["Hudson (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-2591?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15106317#comment-15106317 ] 

Hudson commented on PHOENIX-2591:
---------------------------------

SUCCESS: Integrated in Phoenix-master #1087 (See [https://builds.apache.org/job/Phoenix-master/1087/])
PHOENIX-2591 Minimize transaction commit/rollback for DDL (jtaylor: rev f591da44c9ee85ee7ab0fa910e3b18e649d86cdf)
* phoenix-core/src/test/java/org/apache/phoenix/util/TestUtil.java
* phoenix-core/src/main/java/org/apache/phoenix/execute/MutationState.java
* phoenix-core/src/main/java/org/apache/phoenix/util/TransactionUtil.java


> Minimize transaction commit/rollback for DDL
> --------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: PHOENIX-2591
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-2591
>             Project: Phoenix
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: James Taylor
>            Assignee: James Taylor
>             Fix For: 4.7.0
>
>         Attachments: PHOENIX-2591.patch
>
>
> Seems that the number of times we commit/rollback transactions during DDL operations could be improved. See TransactionUtil.getTableTimestamp() for example. There'd also be another couple when MutationState.commitWriteFence() is called when a CREATE INDEX is performed too.
> I realize we're doing this to get the transaction read pointer to "catch up" to the current time, as we use the read pointer as our "current time" for transactional tables. However,  what would the impact be if we used the transaction write pointer instead? 
> At a minimum, we need to document what we're doing before we forget.



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