hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: code review: HBASE-5179 Concurrent processing of processFaileOver and ServerShutdownHandler may cause region to be assigned before log splitting is completed, causing data loss
Date Fri, 20 Jan 2012 22:02:19 GMT
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-4748 provides the scenario
which 5179-90v17.txt fixes.

FYI

On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 1:50 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com> wrote:

> Writing unit test is a good idea.
>
> See the following comments for scenarios:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5179?focusedCommentId=13186099&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13186099
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5179?focusedCommentId=13186208&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13186208
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5179?focusedCommentId=13186720&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13186720
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5179?focusedCommentId=13188979&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13188979
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5179?focusedCommentId=13188983&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13188983
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5179?focusedCommentId=13189186&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13189186
>
> Cheers
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 1:31 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 9:57 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > There have been several rounds of bug fixing since v11.
>> >
>> > Please take a look at 5179-90v17.txt which passed test on Jinchao's
>> > cluster.
>> > Once code review passed for 5179-90v17.txt, I will prepare patches for
>> > TRUNK and 0.92 branch.
>> >
>> >
>> In review of v11, I suggested we needed tests or at least test scenarios
>> outlined (if latter done I volunteered to try and write tests for trunk at
>> least) especially because I'm unclear on what we're actually fixing with
>> the patch at this stage. I also suggested breaking up the patch into
>> smaller, targeted pieces as a means of undoing the complexity so mere
>> mortals like myself can follow along.  I don't see this done in v17.
>>
>> St.Ack
>>
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message