hbase-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "HBase Review Board (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (HBASE-2553) Revisit IncrementColumnValue implementation in 0.22
Date Fri, 16 Jul 2010 20:25:50 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-2553?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12889304#action_12889304

HBase Review Board commented on HBASE-2553:

Message from: stack@duboce.net

This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:

Ship it!


There are a few minors in the below perhaps worth considering.


    Why not just use newKv?  If there is a kv in front of newKv, then our counters are going
to be off?


    See KeyValue.matchingQualifier() or KeyValue.matchingColumn


    There is a tab here?

- stack

> Revisit IncrementColumnValue implementation in 0.22
> ---------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: HBASE-2553
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-2553
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: ryan rawson
>            Assignee: ryan rawson
>             Fix For: 0.92.0
> right now we are using too much of the old get code, we need to review that and constrain
how this works but without breaking ICV.
> Also we should be resetting the timestamp on every ICV call, and removing the older version.
 Instead of 'updating' an ICV "in place" we should be adding a new one, removing the old one
from memstore (if it is there).  This will play well with the atomic approach added in HBASE-2248
since we are only touching 1 KeyValue at a time.

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

View raw message