hbase-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Ted Yu (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-3777) Redefine Identity Of HBase Configuration
Date Thu, 21 Apr 2011 00:26:06 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-3777?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13022568#comment-13022568
] 

Ted Yu commented on HBASE-3777:
-------------------------------

Since the close method below doesn't show up in diff on review board, I want to comment here:
{code}
    void close(boolean stopProxy) {
{code}
What I meant was that the original call in deleteConnection(Configuration conf, boolean stopProxy):
{code}
      if (t != null) {
        t.close(stopProxy);
      }
{code}
can be used when reference count reaches zero. So we would have:
{code}
  public static void deleteConnection(Configuration conf, boolean stopProxy) {
    synchronized (HBASE_INSTANCES) {
      HConnectionKey connectionKey = new HConnectionKey(conf);
      HConnectionImplementation connection = HBASE_INSTANCES
          .get(connectionKey);
      if (connection != null) {
        if (connection.decRef() == 0) {
          HBASE_INSTANCES.remove(connectionKey);
          connection.close(stopProxy);
        } else if (stopProxy) {
          connection.stopProxyOnClose(stopProxy);
        }
      }
    }
  }
{code}


> Redefine Identity Of HBase Configuration
> ----------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-3777
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-3777
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: client, ipc
>    Affects Versions: 0.90.2
>            Reporter: Karthick Sankarachary
>            Assignee: Karthick Sankarachary
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 0.92.0
>
>         Attachments: HBASE-3777-V2.patch, HBASE-3777-V3.patch, HBASE-3777-V4.patch, HBASE-3777.patch
>
>
> Judging from the javadoc in {{HConnectionManager}}, sharing connections across multiple
clients going to the same cluster is supposedly a good thing. However, the fact that there
is a one-to-one mapping between a configuration and connection instance, kind of works against
that goal. Specifically, when you create {{HTable}} instances using a given {{Configuration}}
instance and a copy thereof, we end up with two distinct {{HConnection}} instances under the
covers. Is this really expected behavior, especially given that the configuration instance
gets cloned a lot?
> Here, I'd like to play devil's advocate and propose that we "deep-compare" {{HBaseConfiguration}}
instances, so that multiple {{HBaseConfiguration}} instances that have the same properties
map to the same {{HConnection}} instance. In case one is "concerned that a single {{HConnection}}
is insufficient for sharing amongst clients",  to quote the javadoc, then one should be able
to mark a given {{HBaseConfiguration}} instance as being "uniquely identifiable".
> Note that "sharing connections makes clean up of {{HConnection}} instances a little awkward",
unless of course, you apply the change described in HBASE-3766.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

Mime
View raw message