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 D12FE200D15 for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2017 19:45:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id D08A01609D2; Thu, 5 Oct 2017 17:45:06 +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 2B3F3160BDA for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2017 19:45:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 1375 invoked by uid 500); 5 Oct 2017 17:45:05 -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 1298 invoked by uid 99); 5 Oct 2017 17:45:05 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd2-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 05 Oct 2017 17:45:05 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd2-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd2-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 8C82B1A3197 for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2017 17:45:04 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd2-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -99.202 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-99.202 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[KAM_ASCII_DIVIDERS=0.8, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-lw-us.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd2-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3j19L-OIVcQW for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2017 17:45:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org (mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org [209.188.14.139]) by mx1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTP id 8E5D85F1BA for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2017 17:45:03 +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 2D543E0041 for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2017 17:45:03 +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 49B3A24349 for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2017 17:45:01 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2017 17:45:01 +0000 (UTC) From: "Umesh Agashe (JIRA)" To: issues@hbase.apache.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Subject: [jira] [Updated] (HBASE-18703) Inconsistent behavior for preBatchMutate in doMiniBatchMutate and processRowsWithLocks MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 archived-at: Thu, 05 Oct 2017 17:45:07 -0000 [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-18703?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Umesh Agashe updated HBASE-18703: --------------------------------- Attachment: hbase-18703.master.007.patch Addressed a few review comments. > Inconsistent behavior for preBatchMutate in doMiniBatchMutate and processRowsWithLocks > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: HBASE-18703 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-18703 > Project: HBase > Issue Type: Sub-task > Components: Coprocessors > Reporter: Duo Zhang > Assignee: Umesh Agashe > Priority: Critical > Fix For: 2.0.0-alpha-4 > > Attachments: hbase-18703.master.001.patch, hbase-18703.master.002.patch, hbase-18703.master.003.patch, hbase-18703.master.004.patch, hbase-18703.master.005.patch, hbase-18703.master.005.patch, hbase-18703.master.005.patch, hbase-18703.master.006.patch, hbase-18703.master.007.patch > > > In doMiniBatchMutate, the preBatchMutate is called before building WAL, but in processRowsWithLocks, we suggest the RowProcessor implementation to build WAL in process method, which is ahead of preBatchMutate. > If a CP modifies the mutations, especially if it removes some cells from the mutations, then the behavior of processRowsWithLocks is broken. The changes applied to memstore and WAL will be different. And there is no way to remove entries from a WALEdit through CP. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)