phoenix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Geoffrey Jacoby (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (PHOENIX-4229) Parent-Child linking rows in System.Catalog break tenant view replication
Date Wed, 11 Oct 2017 17:15:01 GMT


Geoffrey Jacoby commented on PHOENIX-4229:

Attached a v3 that just added an extra line to the class comments for the WAL filter to make
clear that we also copy the child links, as [~jamestaylor] suggested. Since it's just a comment
change, there doesn't seem to be a point in resubmitting it to Jenkins. 

Also note that I did add logic to a test as part of this patch, and confirmed that it was
run as part of the Jeknins run, so I'm not sure why HadoopQA thinks I'm -1 on test changes.

> Parent-Child linking rows in System.Catalog break tenant view replication
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: PHOENIX-4229
>                 URL:
>             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-v2.patch, PHOENIX-4229-v3.patch, 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

View raw message