[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-3997?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16080865#comment-16080865
]
Geoffrey Jacoby commented on PHOENIX-3997:
------------------------------------------
Thanks, [~jamestaylor], I had missed the "pk changing" clause of the
areMutationsInSameRegion logic. (Note that this makes the variable name
somewhat misleading...)
I'll update my patch as you suggest so that the flush wait skip only occurs if
we know for sure they're different tables.
> UngroupedAggregateRegionObserver.commitBatchWithHTable() should not check the
> memstore size and wait for flush.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: PHOENIX-3997
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-3997
> Project: Phoenix
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Thomas D'Silva
> Assignee: Geoffrey Jacoby
> Fix For: 4.12.0
>
> Attachments: PHOENIX-3997.patch
>
>
> [~ankit.singhal]
> In UngroupedAggregateRegionObserver.commitBatchWithHTable() do we need to
> check the memstore size and wait for the flush. We are using a htable to
> write the mutations.
> {code}
> // When memstore size reaches blockingMemstoreSize we are waiting 3 seconds
> for the
> // flush happen which decrease the memstore size and then writes
> allowed on the region.
> for (int i = 0; region.getMemstoreSize().get() > blockingMemstoreSize
> && i < 30; i++) {
> try {
> checkForRegionClosing();
> Thread.sleep(100);
> } catch (InterruptedException e) {
> Thread.currentThread().interrupt();
> throw new IOException(e);
> }
> }
> logger.debug("Committing batch of " + mutations.size() + " mutations
> for " + table);
> try {
> table.batch(mutations);
> } catch (InterruptedException e) {
> throw new RuntimeException(e);
> }
> {code}
> FYI [~jamestaylor] [~apurtell]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
