Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 677A5200C22 for ; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 02:27:46 +0100 (CET) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 66070160B62; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 01:27:46 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id B048D160B56 for ; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 02:27:45 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 64128 invoked by uid 500); 7 Feb 2017 01:27:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact issues-help@hbase.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list issues@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 64117 invoked by uid 99); 7 Feb 2017 01:27:44 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd3-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 01:27:44 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd3-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd3-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 7B892180371 for ; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 01:27:44 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd3-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY=1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.999] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd3-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.10]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id l0N0wo16YrjG for ; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 01:27:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org (mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org [209.188.14.139]) by mx1-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-eu.apache.org) with ESMTP id 1B3445FCD2 for ; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 01:27:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jira-lw-us.apache.org (unknown [207.244.88.139]) by mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 559D6E030A for ; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 01:27:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jira-lw-us.apache.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jira-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at jira-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTP id B311F2528E for ; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 01:27:41 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 01:27:41 +0000 (UTC) From: "Duo Zhang (JIRA)" To: issues@hbase.apache.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Subject: [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-17599) Use mayHaveMoreCellsInRow instead of isPartial MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 archived-at: Tue, 07 Feb 2017 01:27:46 -0000 [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17599?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15855111#comment-15855111 ] Duo Zhang commented on HBASE-17599: ----------------------------------- Any concerns on the new approach? [~stack] [~anoop.hbase] [~yangzhe1991]. Thanks. > Use mayHaveMoreCellsInRow instead of isPartial > ---------------------------------------------- > > Key: HBASE-17599 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17599 > Project: HBase > Issue Type: Sub-task > Components: Client, scan > Affects Versions: 2.0.0, 1.4.0 > Reporter: Duo Zhang > Assignee: Duo Zhang > Fix For: 2.0.0, 1.4.0 > > Attachments: HBASE-17599.patch, HBASE-17599-v1.patch > > > For now if we set scan.allowPartial(true), the partial result returned will have the partial flag set to true. But for scan.setBatch(xx), the partial result returned will not be marked as partial. > This is an Incompatible change, indeed. But I do not think it will introduce any issues as we just provide more informations to client. The old partial flag for batched scan is always false so I do not think anyone can make use of it. > This is very important for the limited scan to support partial results from server. If we get a Result which partial flag is false then we know we get the whole row. Otherwise we need to fetch one more row to see if the row key is changed which causes the logic to be more complicated. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)