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-13286) Minimum timeout for a rpc call could be 1 ms instead of 2 seconds
Date Thu, 19 Mar 2015 17:17:39 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-13286?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14369735#comment-14369735

Nicolas Liochon commented on HBASE-13286:

bq. Good catch.
Not really, it's me who put it a while ago (to fix the infinite timeout), and I've been questioning
myself about this for a while. :-)

bq. Why remove MIN_RPC_TIMEOUT though? Why not just set it to 1 instead of 2000?
I thought it would make the code simpler to read. As you like, I can change it.

For the stack during the tests:

It's because H10 is configured to run two builds in parallel, and this is looking for trouble.
We ran with a oozie build.

>From what I see the findbug is already not from me.

I will commit tomorrow my time if there is no objection.

> Minimum timeout for a rpc call could be 1 ms instead of 2 seconds
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: HBASE-13286
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-13286
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Client
>    Affects Versions: 1.0.0, 0.98.12
>            Reporter: Nicolas Liochon
>            Assignee: Nicolas Liochon
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 1.1.0
>         Attachments: 13286.patch
> There is a check in the client to be sure that we don't use a timeout of zero (i.e. infinite).
This includes setting the minimal time out for a rpc timeout to 2 seconds. However, it makes
sense for some calls (typically gets going to the cache) to have much lower timeouts. So it's
better to do the check vs. zero but with a minimal timeout of 1. 
> I fixed a typo & a wrong comment in this patch as well. I don't understand this code:
> {code}
>       // t could be a RemoteException so go around again.
>       translateException(t); // We don't use the result?
> {code}
> but may be it's good.

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

View raw message