Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-accumulo-user-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-accumulo-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C441EE14F for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 14:40:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 90634 invoked by uid 500); 17 Jan 2013 14:40:26 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-accumulo-user-archive@accumulo.apache.org Received: (qmail 90590 invoked by uid 500); 17 Jan 2013 14:40:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@accumulo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@accumulo.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@accumulo.apache.org Received: (qmail 90575 invoked by uid 99); 17 Jan 2013 14:40:26 -0000 Received: from minotaur.apache.org (HELO minotaur.apache.org) (140.211.11.9) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 14:40:26 +0000 Received: from localhost (HELO mail-pb0-f46.google.com) (127.0.0.1) (smtp-auth username billie, mechanism plain) by minotaur.apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 14:40:25 +0000 Received: by mail-pb0-f46.google.com with SMTP id wy7so1437593pbc.33 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 06:40:25 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.68.243.69 with SMTP id ww5mr14086328pbc.45.1358433625292; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 06:40:25 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.68.15.105 with HTTP; Thu, 17 Jan 2013 06:40:25 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <73780D65-F8DF-4BFF-B816-F4FEAC19CFB3@gmail.com> References: <73780D65-F8DF-4BFF-B816-F4FEAC19CFB3@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 06:40:25 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Insert and delete row From: Billie Rinaldi To: user@accumulo.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b2e3d0cafc0ea04d37cf979 --047d7b2e3d0cafc0ea04d37cf979 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 5:59 AM, Roshan Punnoose wrote: > We had noticed some interesting behavior in our Accumulo instance. When we > delete a row and add that exact same row (with the same timestamp) after > the delete, the row still does not exist. It makes sense because the delete > really just adds a delete row that tells Accumulo to ignore any row that is > equal to it. Is there a way to bypass this? Where I could set up my own > iterator to decide if a row should be deleted or not? (not sure how I would > decide yet, but just seeing if it is possible to bypass the delete logic as > is) > If you do a full compaction before re-inserting the entry, the deletion entry will be removed. I believe compacting a range is also sufficient (available in newer versions of Accumulo). Billie > > I tried to set up an Iterator in priority=1 to see if I could see a delete > row, but it did not seem to make it to my iterator. > > Any ideas? > > Roshan Punnoose > roshanp@gmail.com > > > > --047d7b2e3d0cafc0ea04d37cf979 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 5:59 AM, Roshan Punnoose <roshanp@gmail.com>= ; wrote:

I tried to set up an Iterator in priority=3D1 to see if I could see a delet= e row, but it did not seem to make it to my iterator.

Any ideas?

Roshan Punnoose
roshanp@gmail.com




--047d7b2e3d0cafc0ea04d37cf979--