Github user JamesRTaylor commented on a diff in the pull request:

    https://github.com/apache/phoenix/pull/156#discussion_r58640556
  
    --- Diff: 
phoenix-core/src/main/java/org/apache/phoenix/iterate/TableResultIterator.java 
---
    @@ -107,8 +127,37 @@ public synchronized void close() throws SQLException {
         @Override
         public synchronized Tuple next() throws SQLException {
             initScanner();
    -        Tuple t = scanIterator.next();
    -        return t;
    +        try {
    +            lastTuple = scanIterator.next();
    +            if (lastTuple != null) {
    +                ImmutableBytesWritable ptr = new ImmutableBytesWritable();
    +                lastTuple.getKey(ptr);
    +            }
    +        } catch (SQLException e) {
    +            try {
    +                throw ServerUtil.parseServerException(e);
    +            } catch(StaleRegionBoundaryCacheException e1) {
    +                if(scan.getAttribute(NON_AGGREGATE_QUERY)!=null) {
    +                    Scan newScan = ScanUtil.newScan(scan);
    +                    if(lastTuple != null) {
    +                        lastTuple.getKey(ptr);
    +                        byte[] startRowSuffix = 
ByteUtil.copyKeyBytesIfNecessary(ptr);
    +                        if(ScanUtil.isLocalIndex(newScan)) {
    +                            newScan.setAttribute(SCAN_START_ROW_SUFFIX, 
ByteUtil.nextKey(startRowSuffix));
    +                        } else {
    +                            
newScan.setStartRow(ByteUtil.nextKey(startRowSuffix));
    +                        }
    +                    }
    +                    
plan.getContext().getConnection().getQueryServices().clearTableRegionCache(htable.getTableName());
    +                    this.scanIterator =
    +                            
plan.iterator(DefaultParallelScanGrouper.getInstance(), newScan);
    --- End diff --
    
    Yes, exactly. Except for the ordered aggregation case, which needs to be 
handled as the non aggregate is handled (i.e. we'd still throw the stale region 
boundary exception, but the client would need to react to it as you've done for 
the non aggregate case. We need to know which exact row key we're on though 
(which the client won't know). Seems like the more feasible approach would be 
to include the row key in the exception and deserialize it on the client side.


---
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 infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

Reply via email to