HBASE-13158 speaks abt this.. Sorry I missed this completely. I will
work on a new patch for this.
-Anoop-
On Sat, Apr 4, 2015 at 12:28 AM, Jerry He <jerry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The acl table and label tables are currently guarded in the
> AccessController or VisibilityController. As Srikanth mentioned, it is
> related to HBASE-13336.
> Should we avoid duplicate checking and make the logic/responsibility clear?
> The problem probably also exist for the delete/alter/modify table
> operations.
>
> Jerry
>
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Stephen Jiang <syuanjiang...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > yes, my proposed change is that do the 'tableName.isSystemTable ()'
> check,
> > instead of 'tableName.equals(TableName.META_TABLE_NAME)' - this check
> would
> > include all tables inside the hbase namespace.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Stephen
> >
> > By the way, we should rename the 'hbase' namespace to 'system' namespace
> to
> > make it clearer :-). Now is too late :-(.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 5:33 PM, Sean Busbey <bus...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> >
> > > +1 disabling the visibility label table is going to be a bad time.
> > >
> > > Maybe just disallow for the whole hbase namespace?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Sean
> > > On Apr 2, 2015 5:54 PM, "Stephen Jiang" <syuanjiang...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > In disable table, we specifically check whether it is a META table;
> if
> > a
> > > > table is a META table, we disallow the table disable. However, I
> think
> > > > other system tables should have the same treatment (is it possible
> > that a
> > > > namespace table is disable and the system is still functional without
> > > > issue?).
> > > >
> > > > if(tableName.equals(TableName.META_TABLE_NAME)) {
> > > >
> > > > throw new ConstraintException("Cannot disable catalog table");
> > > >
> > > > }
> > > > I want to extend the disable-not-allowed treatment to all system
> > tables,
> > > > please let me know if you disagree.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > > Stephen
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
