Mailing-List: contact dev-help@accumulo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@accumulo.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="===============6828456816063066570=="
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: Review Request 18444: ACCUMULO-2399 Continuous* wait a bit for
 scanners
From: "Bill Havanki" <bhavanki@clouderagovt.com>
To: "Sean Busbey" <sean@manvsbeard.com>,
 "Bill Havanki" <bhavanki@clouderagovt.com>,
 "accumulo" <dev@accumulo.apache.org>, "Mike Drob" <mdrob@mdrob.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 17:55:46 -0000
Message-ID: <20140225175546.21193.62446@reviews.apache.org>
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Sender: "Bill Havanki" <noreply@reviews.apache.org>
References: <20140225002325.21193.1519@reviews.apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <20140225002325.21193.1519@reviews.apache.org>
Reply-To: "Bill Havanki" <bhavanki@clouderagovt.com>

--===============6828456816063066570==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


> On Feb. 24, 2014, 7:23 p.m., Sean Busbey wrote:
> > Is there a disadvantage to instead updating the README to require creating the table ahead of time? That way we could avoid this code, and we could remove the table creation code from the writers.
> > 
> > As a side effect, there'd also be a set where the tester would implicitly confirm that the user/password for accessing Accumulo works and can deal with the table.
> 
> Mike Drob wrote:
>     The README already instructs the user to create the table before running. It could be made more clear, though.
> 
> Sean Busbey wrote:
>     If the README already tells the user to create the table all the more reason to enforce following the instructions.
> 
> Mike Drob wrote:
>     So you suggest removing the table creation code path from ingest? I'd be ok with that.
> 
> Sean Busbey wrote:
>     yeah. maybe update the error handling in both ingest and the reader clients so that when the table doesn't exists it says to go back to the instructions on creating the table.

+1


- Bill


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/18444/#review35352
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Feb. 24, 2014, 6:35 p.m., Mike Drob wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/18444/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Feb. 24, 2014, 6:35 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for accumulo.
> 
> 
> Bugs: ACCUMULO-2399
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-2399
> 
> 
> Repository: accumulo
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> ACCUMULO-2399 Continuous* wait a bit for scanners
> 
> When starting ContinuousIngest concurrently with consumers, many of the
> consumers would die if they came up before the table had been created.
> Make the code a bit more robust during start-up.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/server/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/server/test/continuous/ContinuousBatchWalker.java 4659affc49fc7fc2519e092330dda817ccbbadcd 
>   src/server/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/server/test/continuous/ContinuousQuery.java c8ae6ecf9e5ef2bd51cb803cba429baaf57f3d6a 
>   src/server/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/server/test/continuous/ContinuousScanner.java 0ac3df63a260a201544b3623d4901b355d7ea21a 
>   src/server/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/server/test/continuous/ContinuousUtil.java PRE-CREATION 
>   src/server/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/server/test/continuous/ContinuousWalk.java 7d1e7f95c7e5a7a172990322e2992e536f2725e3 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/18444/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Unit tests. Started processes on 3 node cluster and batch walkers did not die.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Mike Drob
> 
>


--===============6828456816063066570==--