Github user joshelser commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/accumulo/pull/260#discussion_r119154379
--- Diff:
server/tserver/src/main/java/org/apache/accumulo/tserver/tablet/Tablet.java ---
@@ -715,47 +722,54 @@ Batch nextBatch(SortedKeyValueIterator<Key,Value>
iter, Range range, int num, Se
long maxResultsSize =
tableConfiguration.getAsBytes(Property.TABLE_SCAN_MAXMEM);
- if (columns.size() == 0) {
- iter.seek(range, LocalityGroupUtil.EMPTY_CF_SET, false);
- } else {
- iter.seek(range, LocalityGroupUtil.families(columns), true);
- }
-
Key continueKey = null;
boolean skipContinueKey = false;
boolean endOfTabletReached = false;
- while (iter.hasTop()) {
- value = iter.getTopValue();
- key = iter.getTopKey();
+ try {
+ if (columns.size() == 0) {
+ iter.seek(range, LocalityGroupUtil.EMPTY_CF_SET, false);
--- End diff --
> The key placed in the ScanYieldException is not the start of the initial
range. It is the key where it left off in the underlying scan
You can't guarantee this. What I am saying is: what _if_ the key you see is
the same?
Your last comment makes me think that you intend for this exception to
never be thrown when "no progress" was made. If that's correct, documentation
needs to adequately warn..
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at [email protected] or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
