[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-193?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13160105#comment-13160105
]
Adam Fuchs commented on ACCUMULO-193:
-------------------------------------
That's true that the timestamp solution is imperfect: keys that actually use a
timestamp of Long.MIN_VALUE would be left out. However, this is probably a moot
discussion because Billie traced this down to the Key.toString() function.
Basically, for "fake" keys used for specifying ranges we should never be
validating the column visibility. Removing this validation from Key.toString()
should solve the problem.
> key.followingKey(PartialKey.ROW_COLFAM_COLQUAL_COLVIS) can produce a key with
> an invalid COLVIS
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ACCUMULO-193
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-193
> Project: Accumulo
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Adam Fuchs
> Assignee: Adam Fuchs
> Priority: Minor
>
> Need a new algorithm for calculating the next biggest column visibility,
> because tagging \0 to the end creates an invalid column visibility. We might
> be able to minimize the timestamp for this (i.e. set timestamp to
> Long.MIN_VALUE, but keep column and row elements the same).
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
