[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-3534?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16495797#comment-16495797
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on PHOENIX-3534:
-----------------------------------------
Github user JamesRTaylor commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/phoenix/pull/303#discussion_r191942250
--- Diff:
phoenix-core/src/main/java/org/apache/phoenix/coprocessor/MetaDataEndpointImpl.java
---
@@ -2227,35 +2551,36 @@ private MetaDataMutationResult doDropTable(byte[]
key, byte[] tenantId, byte[] s
// in 0.94.4, thus if we try to use it here we can no longer
use the 0.94.2 version
// of the client.
Delete delete = new Delete(indexKey, clientTimeStamp);
- rowsToDelete.add(delete);
- acquireLock(region, indexKey, locks);
+ catalogMutations.add(delete);
MetaDataMutationResult result =
doDropTable(indexKey, tenantId, schemaName, indexName,
tableName, PTableType.INDEX,
- rowsToDelete, invalidateList, locks,
tableNamesToDelete, sharedTablesToDelete, false, clientVersion);
+ catalogMutations, childLinkMutations,
invalidateList, tableNamesToDelete, sharedTablesToDelete, false, clientVersion);
if (result.getMutationCode() !=
MutationCode.TABLE_ALREADY_EXISTS) {
return result;
}
}
+ // no need to pass sharedTablesToDelete back to the client as they
deletion of these tables
+ // is already handled in MetadataClient.dropTable
--- End diff --
Not sure if this is handled differently now, but we passed this back
because I believe we don't know on the client all of the physical index tables
to delete. I think we have a test for this.
> Support multi region SYSTEM.CATALOG table
> -----------------------------------------
>
> Key: PHOENIX-3534
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-3534
> Project: Phoenix
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: James Taylor
> Assignee: Thomas D'Silva
> Priority: Major
> Attachments: PHOENIX-3534-wip.patch
>
>
> Currently Phoenix requires that the SYSTEM.CATALOG table is single region
> based on the server-side row locks being held for operations that impact a
> table and all of it's views. For example, adding/removing a column from a
> base table pushes this change to all views.
> As an alternative to making the SYSTEM.CATALOG transactional (PHOENIX-2431),
> when a new table is created we can do a lazy cleanup of any rows that may be
> left over from a failed DDL call (kudos to [~lhofhansl] for coming up with
> this idea). To implement this efficiently, we'd need to also do PHOENIX-2051
> so that we can efficiently find derived views.
> The implementation would rely on an optimistic concurrency model based on
> checking our sequence numbers for each table/view before/after updating. Each
> table/view row would be individually locked for their change (metadata for a
> view or table cannot span regions due to our split policy), with the sequence
> number being incremented under lock and then returned to the client.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
