[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-3360?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15865236#comment-15865236
]
William Yang commented on PHOENIX-3360:
---------------------------------------
bq. CompoundConfiguration treats the added configs as immutable, and has an
internal mutable config (see the code). This means that with the original
patch, the rest of region server (including replication) will not be affected.
I've done a simple test, see {{ConfCP.java}}. If we change the RegionServer
level configuration in a coprocessor, then all the other Regions opened on the
same RS will see the change. It has nothing to do with the implementation of
Configuration class or any other internal classes, but is determined by where a
region's Configuration object comes from.
I checked the code in both hbase 1.1.2 and 0.94. See
{{RegionCoprocessorHost#getTableCoprocessorAttrsFromSchema()}} for 1.1 and
{{RegionCoprocessorHost#loadTableCoprocessors()}} for 0.94.
Each region will have its own copy of Configuration, which are all copied from
the region server's configuration object. So it is safe to change the
configuration returned by {{CoprocessorEnvironment#getConfiguration()}} and
this change can be seen only within this Region. But we should never change the
Configurations return by
{{RegionCoprocessorEnvironment#getRegionServerServices().getConfiguration()}}
for this will change all the other Regions' conf.
How to use ConfCP.java
* create 'test1', 'cf'
* create 'test2', 'cf'
* make sure that all regions of the above two tables are hosted in the same
regionserver
* add coprocessor ConfCP for test1, check log, should see the print below:
{code}
YHYH1: [test1]conf hashCode = 2027310658
YHYH2: [test1]put conf (yh.special.key,XXXXXX)
YHYH3: [test1]get conf (yh.special.key,XXXXXX)
{code}
* add coprocessor ConfCP for test2, check the log again, should see the print
below
{code}
YHYH1: [test2]conf hashCode = 2027310658
YHYH3: [test2]get conf (yh.special.key,XXXXXX)
{code}
Note that {{conf}} can be assigned by two values. for
{code}
conf =
((RegionCoprocessorEnvironment)e).getRegionServerServices().getConfiguration();
{code}
is used now, and this is what we do in V1 patch.
Change it to
{code}
conf = e.getConfiguration();
{code}
then table test2 will not see the change that test1 did.
Above all, we can use the v1 patch with a little modification that we just set
the conf returned by {{CoprocessorEnvironment#getConfiguration()}}. And for
PHOENIX-3271 that UPSART SELECT's write will still have higher priority.
WDYT? Ping [~jamestaylor], [~enis], [~rajeshbabu].
> Secondary index configuration is wrong
> --------------------------------------
>
> Key: PHOENIX-3360
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-3360
> Project: Phoenix
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Enis Soztutar
> Assignee: Rajeshbabu Chintaguntla
> Priority: Critical
> Fix For: 4.10.0
>
> Attachments: ConfCP.java, PHOENIX-3360.patch, PHOENIX-3360-v2.PATCH,
> PHOENIX-3360-v3.PATCH
>
>
> IndexRpcScheduler allocates some handler threads and uses a higher priority
> for RPCs. The corresponding IndexRpcController is not used by default as it
> is, but used through ServerRpcControllerFactory that we configure from Ambari
> by default which sets the priority of the outgoing RPCs to either metadata
> priority, or the index priority.
> However, after reading code of IndexRpcController / ServerRpcController it
> seems that the IndexRPCController DOES NOT look at whether the outgoing RPC
> is for an Index table or not. It just sets ALL rpc priorities to be the index
> priority. The intention seems to be the case that ONLY on servers, we
> configure ServerRpcControllerFactory, and with clients we NEVER configure
> ServerRpcControllerFactory, but instead use ClientRpcControllerFactory. We
> configure ServerRpcControllerFactory from Ambari, which in affect makes it so
> that ALL rpcs from Phoenix are only handled by the index handlers by default.
> It means all deadlock cases are still there.
> The documentation in https://phoenix.apache.org/secondary_indexing.html is
> also wrong in this sense. It does not talk about server side / client side.
> Plus this way of configuring different values is not how HBase configuration
> is deployed. We cannot have the configuration show the
> ServerRpcControllerFactory even only for server nodes, because the clients
> running on those nodes will also see the wrong values.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
