hive-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Hive QA (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (HIVE-16642) New Events created as part of replv2 potentially break replv1
Date Mon, 15 May 2017 20:31:04 GMT


Hive QA commented on HIVE-16642:

Here are the results of testing the latest attachment:

{color:green}SUCCESS:{color} +1 due to 3 test(s) being added or modified.

{color:red}ERROR:{color} -1 due to 4 failed/errored test(s), 10715 tests executed
*Failed tests:*
org.apache.hadoop.hive.cli.TestMiniLlapCliDriver.testCliDriver[table_nonprintable] (batchId=140)
org.apache.hadoop.hive.ql.parse.TestReplicationScenarios.testEventFilters (batchId=215)

Test results:
Console output:
Test logs:

Executing org.apache.hive.ptest.execution.TestCheckPhase
Executing org.apache.hive.ptest.execution.PrepPhase
Executing org.apache.hive.ptest.execution.ExecutionPhase
Executing org.apache.hive.ptest.execution.ReportingPhase
Tests exited with: TestsFailedException: 4 tests failed

This message is automatically generated.

ATTACHMENT ID: 12868127 - PreCommit-HIVE-Build

> New Events created as part of replv2 potentially break replv1
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: HIVE-16642
>                 URL:
>             Project: Hive
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>          Components: repl
>            Reporter: Sushanth Sowmyan
>            Assignee: Sushanth Sowmyan
>         Attachments: HIVE-16642.1.patch, HIVE-16642.2.patch
> We have a couple of new events introduced, such as \{CREATE,DROP\}\{INDEX,FUNCTION\}
since the introduction of replv1, but those which do not have a replv1 ReplicationTask associated
with them.
> Thus, for users like Falcon, we potentially wind up throwing a IllegalStateException
if replv1 based HiveDR is running on a cluster with these updated events.
> Thus, we should be more graceful when encountering them, returning a NoopReplicationTask
equivalent that they can make use of, or ignore, for such newer events.
> In addition, we should add additional test cases so that we track whether or not the
creation of these events leads to any backward incompatibility we introduce. To this end,
if any of the events should change so that we introduce a backward incompatibility, we should
have these tests fail, and alert us to that possibility.

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

View raw message