Compactions work on splits / tablets so you will need to compact the tablet that contains the row.
Tablets correspond to split points, and the rows between the split points are allocated to a single tablet. During a compaction the tablet will process all of the rows in that tablet and write a single file containing the rows for that tablet that pass the compaction filters and that do not contain a deletion marker. With a sample table id=3, name = ns1.tbl2 and split points at aaa, bbb, ccc, ddd, and remainder - I can examine the compaction counters by scanning the metadata table. scan -t accumulo.metadata -b 3; -e 3~ -c srv:compact 3;aaa srv:compact [] 2 3;bbb srv:compact [] 2 3;ccc srv:compact [] 2 3;ddd srv:compact [] 2 3< srv:compact [] 2 Then, run a compaction for split ccc using: compact -w -t ns1.tbl2 -b bbb~ -e ccc results in: scan -t accumulo.metadata -b 3; -e 3~ -c srv:compact 3;aaa srv:compact [] 2 3;bbb srv:compact [] 2 3;ccc srv:compact [] 3 3;ddd srv:compact [] 2 3< srv:compact [] 2 The begin row of the compaction (bbb~) specifies everything that sorts after after the split point bbb. This may help if you want to confirm that you compacted the correct range. On 2023/02/27 19:44:53 Jonathan Allison-Pacheco wrote: > Hi, I'm working on a project where we are needing to initiate a compaction > upon deleting an entry or set of entries. Looking at the > TableOperations.compact method, it asks for `start` and `end` parameters, > which are meant to include all tablets contained between the ones where > those two rows exist, not including the start; such that (start, end]. > > This is a bit confusing to my interpretation, as if I need to run a > compaction where a single row was involved, the method suggests it will > compact the tablets between row+1 and row. Is that interpretation correct, > and if so, is that a proper way of utilizing this method? > > If not, what is the intended way of performing this type of task? > > Thank you, > Jonathan Allison-Pacheco > jpachec...@gmail.com >
