[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-4278?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16348158#comment-16348158 ]
Ohad Shacham commented on PHOENIX-4278: --------------------------------------- [~jamestaylor], As per our discussion I applied the patch on-top-of of 4.x-HBase-1.3 and ran testing. It terminated with the same errors I received when running 4.x-HBase-1.3 without my patch. This are the errors: [*ERROR*] *Failures:* [*ERROR*] *AggregateIT.testAvgGroupByOrderPreservingWithStats:432 expected:<13> but was:<8>* [*INFO*] [*ERROR*] *Tests run: 3365, Failures: 1, Errors: 0, Skipped: 7* [*ERROR*] *Failures:* [*ERROR*] *org.apache.phoenix.end2end.index.MutableIndexFailureIT.testIndexWriteFailure[MutableIndexFailureIT_transactional=false,localIndex=false,isNamespaceMapped=false,disableIndexOnWriteFailure=true,failRebuildTask=false,throwIndexWriteFailure=null](org.apache.phoenix.end2end.index.MutableIndexFailureIT)* [*ERROR*] *Run 1: MutableIndexFailureIT.testIndexWriteFailure:345->checkStateAfterRebuild:389* [*INFO*] *Run 2: PASS* [*INFO*] *Run 3: PASS* [*INFO*] [*ERROR*] *PartialIndexRebuilderIT.testConcurrentUpsertsWithRebuild:221 Ran out of time* [*ERROR*] *PartialIndexRebuilderIT.testMultiVersionsAfterFailure:461* [*ERROR*] *PartialIndexRebuilderIT.testUpsertNullTwiceAfterFailure:521* [*INFO*] [*ERROR*] *Tests run: 600, Failures: 4, Errors: 0, Skipped: 44* > Implement pure client side transactional index maintenance > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: PHOENIX-4278 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-4278 > Project: Phoenix > Issue Type: Improvement > Reporter: James Taylor > Assignee: Ohad Shacham > Priority: Major > > The index maintenance for transactions follows the same model as non > transactional tables - coprocessor based on data table updates that looks up > previous row value to perform maintenance. This is necessary for non > transactional tables to ensure the rows are locked so that a consistent view > may be obtained. However, for transactional tables, the time stamp oracle > ensures uniqueness of time stamps (via transaction IDs) and the filtering > handles a scan seeing the "true" last committed value for a row. Thus, > there's no hard dependency to perform this on the server side. > Moving the index maintenance to the client side would prevent any RS->RS RPC > calls (which have proved to be troublesome for HBase). It would require > returning more data to the client (i.e. the prior row value), but this seems > like a reasonable tradeoff. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v7.6.3#76005)