Mailing-List: contact issues-help@hbase.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <28981133.266221294697508449.JavaMail.jira@thor>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 17:11:48 -0500 (EST)
From: "ryan rawson (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: issues@hbase.apache.org
Subject: [jira] Commented: (HBASE-3021) Timestamp mismatch between WAL and
 MemStore for ICVs
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-3021?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12979799#action_12979799 ] 

ryan rawson commented on HBASE-3021:
------------------------------------

this is because we previously needed to avoid having 2 KVs with the same timestamp, otherwise we might read from the 'older' one with a smaller value and affect counter values.

With the work on HBASE-2856 we wont have to do this anymore.

> Timestamp mismatch between WAL and MemStore for ICVs
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-3021
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-3021
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Jean-Daniel Cryans
>            Priority: Minor
>
> We've been running replication for a little while now and the tool I wrote to verify replicated data (will be posted in HBASE-3013) works great, unless that data is counters. The reason is that in HRegion.incrementColumnValue we append to the WAL a KV with a timestamp that we're not reusing for the MemStore (since we do some processing on it in updateColumnValue), so the replicated KV is different and comparing sets of rows using time ranges usually fails because one row will almost surely be cut in half on the edges (at least this is what my testing shows).
> I guess this is also an issue on the slave cluster since if we don't want values on the same ts on the master cluster, why would we want it elsewhere?

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