accumulo-notifications mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "John Vines (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (ACCUMULO-2059) Namespace constraints easily get clobbered by table constraints
Date Sat, 25 Jan 2014 00:00:39 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-2059?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13881546#comment-13881546
] 

John Vines commented on ACCUMULO-2059:
--------------------------------------

It's not that different then the issue with system level constraints vs.
Normal constraints. I'm thinking either disable or ignore for 1.6 and then
this can be addressed by the other fix for that issue, which is to make
their settings more like iterators.

Sent from my phone, please pardon the typos and brevity.



> Namespace constraints easily get clobbered by table constraints
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: ACCUMULO-2059
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-2059
>             Project: Accumulo
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: client
>            Reporter: John Vines
>             Fix For: 1.6.0
>
>
> This is why ShellServerIT#namespaces is failing currently. When you create a table with
the default configurations, that includes a DefaultKeySizeConstraint at constraint.1. This
overlaps the namespaces defined constraint.1, which is a NumericValueConstraint for the test.
> The issue is I'm not sure if this is accepted behavior or not. Constraint settings are
already sorta wonky, but this is not the time to rewrite it. Before I fix it, I just need
to know if that is tolerable behavior or if we want namespace constraints to start at a different
value, like constraint.101 to minimize impact. Thoughts are requested.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1.5#6160)

Mime
View raw message