Return-Path: 
 <user-return-36637-apmail-hbase-user-archive=hbase.apache.org@hbase.apache.org>
X-Original-To: apmail-hbase-user-archive@www.apache.org
Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-user-archive@www.apache.org
Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3])
	by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6529210431
	for <apmail-hbase-user-archive@www.apache.org>;
 Wed,  5 Jun 2013 04:37:49 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 6095 invoked by uid 500); 5 Jun 2013 04:37:46 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-user-archive@hbase.apache.org
Received: (qmail 6013 invoked by uid 500); 5 Jun 2013 04:37:46 -0000
Mailing-List: contact user-help@hbase.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:user-help@hbase.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:user-unsubscribe@hbase.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:user@hbase.apache.org>
List-Id: <user.hbase.apache.org>
Reply-To: user@hbase.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list user@hbase.apache.org
Received: (qmail 6004 invoked by uid 99); 5 Jun 2013 04:37:45 -0000
Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 05 Jun 2013 04:37:45 +0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0
	tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of anoop.hbase@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.216.174 as permitted sender)
Received: from [209.85.216.174] (HELO mail-qc0-f174.google.com)
 (209.85.216.174)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 05 Jun 2013 04:37:40 +0000
Received: by mail-qc0-f174.google.com with SMTP id m16so668943qcq.33
        for <user@hbase.apache.org>; Tue, 04 Jun 2013 21:37:19 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        bh=lAskGMc67TdZB5bmKadcrGw0t7N7moflCQ5HwSzdvjs=;
        b=ESNv8qLZIZJuT9hso/cKisxNpQ51uZNZovuo02ZYrQ+nuMDCb3uvuTIUHB2rIxDQPi
         msYIk08nNqO8vCfWyQm5aiCJ1gsdEPqrSo0sup6/Y1qKVBExCzm0mgzITQp64DkI6iV9
         eBC+7PP+m/DPIa00PG191y6SlNPWXIDhFiTglyz3AwyXuZj7HZzIdogDkrGIbfq61vCl
         XpVutslDFj+vVeZ0b8gLOHEoUE/LOgAkWBar21s3GC8smZI4fW/niyi53otlR0xJsasX
         +FdMtp83W19zG6jl0Y4qB7Jl2zxBK1K4oakjOjfH8zwy+eDYTt3M4Kgl/LNmekySYDeu
         KGZA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.229.171.202 with SMTP id i10mr10365814qcz.33.1370407039409;
 Tue, 04 Jun 2013 21:37:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.49.132.34 with HTTP; Tue, 4 Jun 2013 21:37:19 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAOEq2C4wd+A4qO+0e6saANfUN8xG-bfqkyQPe51HGjZUCOVJgA@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAOEq2C4wd+A4qO+0e6saANfUN8xG-bfqkyQPe51HGjZUCOVJgA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 10:07:19 +0530
Message-ID: 
 <CAOtJ30oBBwK0+V54+1qmrd5S778NH42GH6bC2gW5_6sTCgvm4Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Replication is on columnfamily level or table level?
From: Anoop John <anoop.hbase@gmail.com>
To: user@hbase.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c35e1ec8244204de60c0d5
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org

--001a11c35e1ec8244204de60c0d5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Yes the replication can be specified at the CF level..  You have used
HCD#setScope() right?

> S => '3', BLOCKSIZE => '65536'}, {*NAME => 'cf2', REPLICATION_SCOPE =>
'2'*,
You set scope as 2?? You have to set one CF to be replicated to one cluster
and another to to another cluster. I dont think it is supported even now.
You can see in the HCD code that there are 2 constants for scope 0 and 1
where 1 means replicate and 0 means not to be  replicated.

-Anoop-

On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 3:31 AM, N Dm <nidmgg@gmail.com> wrote:

> hi, folks,
>
> <hbase 0.94.3>
>
> By reading several documents, I always have the impression that *
> "Replication* works at the table-*column*-*family level*". However, when I
> am setting up a table with two columnfamilies and replicate them to two
> different slavers, the whole table replicated. Is this a bug? Thanks
>
> Here is the simple steps to receate.
>
> *Environment: *
> Replication Master: hdtest014
> Replication Slave 1: hdtest017
> Replication Slave 2: hdtest009
>
> *Create Table*: on Master, and the two slaves:  create 't2_dn','cf1','cf2'
>
> *setup replication on Master*(hdtest014), so that
> Master> list_peers
>  PEER_ID CLUSTER_KEY STATE
>  1 hdtest017.svl.ibm.com:2181:/hbase ENABLED
>  2 hdtest009.svl.ibm.com:2181:/hbase ENABLED
> Master> > describe 't2_dn'
> DESCRIPTION
> ENABLED
>  {NAME => 't2_dn', FAMILIES => [{*NAME => 'cf1', REPLICATION_SCOPE => '1'*,
> KEEP_DELETED_CELLS => 'fals
> true
>  e', COMPRESSION => 'NONE', ENCODE_ON_DISK => 'true', BLOCKCACHE => 'true',
> MIN_VERSIONS => '0',
> DATA
>  _BLOCK_ENCODING => 'NONE', IN_MEMORY => 'false', BLOOMFILTER => 'NONE',
> TTL => '2147483647',
> VERSION
>  S => '3', BLOCKSIZE => '65536'}, {*NAME => 'cf2', REPLICATION_SCOPE =>
> '2'*,
> KEEP_DELETED_CELLS =>
> 'fa
>  lse', COMPRESSION => 'NONE', ENCODE_ON_DISK => 'true', BLOCKCACHE =>
> 'true', MIN_VERSIONS => '0',
> DA
>  TA_BLOCK_ENCODING => 'NONE', IN_MEMORY => 'false', BLOOMFILTER => 'NONE',
> TTL => '2147483647',
> VERSI
>  ONS => '3', BLOCKSIZE =>
> '65536'}]}
>
> 1 row(s) in 0.0250 seconds
>
> *Put rows into t2_dn on Master*
> put 't2_dn','row1','cf1:q1','val1cf1fromMaster'
> put 't2_dn','row1','cf2:q1','val1cf2fromMaster'
> put 't2_dn','row2','cf1:q1','val2cf1fromMaster'
> put 't2_dn','row3','cf2:q1','val3cf2fromMaster'
>
> *Expecting cf1 replicated to slave1, and cf2 replicatedto slave2. Where all
> the three clusters got: *
> scan 't2_dn'
> ROW
> COLUMN+CELL
>
>  row1                          column=cf1:q1, timestamp=1370382328358,
> value=val1cf1fromMaster
>  row1                          column=cf2:q1, timestamp=1370382334303,
> value=val1cf2fromMaster
>  row2                          column=cf1:q1, timestamp=1370382351716,
> value=val2cf1fromMaster
>  row3                          column=cf2:q1, timestamp=1370382367724,
> value=val3cf2fromMaster
> 3 row(s) in 0.0160 seconds
>
> Many thanks
>
> Demai
>

--001a11c35e1ec8244204de60c0d5--