phoenix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Thomas D'Silva (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (PHOENIX-4229) Parent-Child linking rows in System.Catalog break tenant view replication
Date Tue, 10 Oct 2017 22:03:01 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-4229?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16199439#comment-16199439
] 

Thomas D'Silva commented on PHOENIX-4229:
-----------------------------------------

[~gjacoby] 

Ah I see,  you are correct the tenant id would be non-null so the existing check would cover
it.

> Parent-Child linking rows in System.Catalog break tenant view replication
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: PHOENIX-4229
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-4229
>             Project: Phoenix
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 4.11.0, 4.12.0
>            Reporter: Geoffrey Jacoby
>            Assignee: Geoffrey Jacoby
>             Fix For: 4.13.0
>
>         Attachments: PHOENIX-4229.patch
>
>
> PHOENIX-2051 introduced new Parent-Child linking rows to System.Catalog that speed up
view deletion. Unfortunately, this breaks assumptions in PHOENIX-3639, which gives a way to
replicate tenant views from one cluster to another. (It assumes that all the metadata for
a tenant view is owned by the tenant -- the linking rows are not.) 
> PHOENIX-3639 was a workaround in the first place to the more fundamental design problem
that Phoenix places the metadata for both table schemas -- which should never be replicated
-- in the same table and column family as the metadata for tenant views, which should be replicated.

> Note that the linking rows also make it more difficult to ever split these two datasets
apart, as proposed in PHOENIX-3520.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

Mime
View raw message