[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-4229?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16193742#comment-16193742
]
Geoffrey Jacoby commented on PHOENIX-4229:
------------------------------------------
It does look like the link would always have a LINK_TYPE of
LinkType.CHILD_TABLE, but there doesn't seem to be a way to tell from that Cell
that it's a CHILD_TABLE link attached to a tenant-owned view, as opposed to a
global view.
(If it's a view on a tenant-view, so that tenant_id in the PK is non-zero, that
would actually be easy to catch -- but that first parent-child link from the
global table to the child tenant-owned view is the problem.)
> Parent-Child linking rows in System.Catalog break tenant view replication
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: PHOENIX-4229
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-4229
> Project: Phoenix
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 4.11.0, 4.12.0
> Reporter: Geoffrey Jacoby
> Assignee: Geoffrey Jacoby
>
> PHOENIX-2051 introduced new Parent-Child linking rows to System.Catalog that
> speed up view deletion. Unfortunately, this breaks assumptions in
> PHOENIX-3639, which gives a way to replicate tenant views from one cluster to
> another. (It assumes that all the metadata for a tenant view is owned by the
> tenant -- the linking rows are not.)
> PHOENIX-3639 was a workaround in the first place to the more fundamental
> design problem that Phoenix places the metadata for both table schemas --
> which should never be replicated -- in the same table and column family as
> the metadata for tenant views, which should be replicated.
> Note that the linking rows also make it more difficult to ever split these
> two datasets apart, as proposed in PHOENIX-3520.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
