hbase-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Nicolas Liochon (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-10606) Bad timeout in RpcRetryingCaller#callWithRetries w/o parameters
Date Tue, 25 Feb 2014 19:34:23 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10606?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13911938#comment-13911938

Nicolas Liochon commented on HBASE-10606:

That's the test result for v1. Still, I'm surprised it made it! I will run the tests with
v2 as well.

bq. Can't we just set it on construction and then be done w/ it rather than provide exotic
I've used the same pattern as in HTable. I think it's useful, as you can do a call with a
different timeout if you need. That's the way I wrote a test for HTable at least.

bq.     private void beforeCall() {
It's replaced by the getRemaining(). It's better, as there is no state anymore in the object.

bq.  If we are removing some infinite timeout, good; commit and lets live w/ the consequence.
Yeah, there will some (bad) consequences for sure...

I'm waiting for the result of v2, I will commit if it's ok. Thanks a lot for the review.

> Bad timeout in RpcRetryingCaller#callWithRetries w/o parameters
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: HBASE-10606
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10606
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Client
>    Affects Versions: 0.99.0
>            Reporter: Nicolas Liochon
>            Assignee: Nicolas Liochon
>             Fix For: 0.99.0
>         Attachments: 10606.v1.patch, 10606.v2.patch
> When we call this method w/o parameters, we don't take into account the configuration,
but use the hardcoded default (Integer.MAX).
> If someone was relying on having an infinite timeout whatever the setting, fixing this
bug will cause him a surprise. But there is no magic...

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

View raw message