Github user twdsilva commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/phoenix/pull/303#discussion_r192460500
--- Diff: phoenix-core/src/it/java/org/apache/phoenix/end2end/ViewIT.java
---
@@ -388,51 +435,65 @@ public void
testViewAndTableInDifferentSchemas(boolean isNamespaceMapped) throws
} catch (TableNotFoundException ignore) {
}
ddl = "DROP TABLE " + fullTableName1;
- validateCannotDropTableWithChildViewsWithoutCascade(conn,
fullTableName1);
ddl = "DROP VIEW " + fullViewName2;
conn.createStatement().execute(ddl);
ddl = "DROP TABLE " + fullTableName1;
conn.createStatement().execute(ddl);
}
-
+
@Test
- public void testDisallowDropOfColumnOnParentTable() throws Exception {
+ public void testDropOfColumnOnParentTableInvalidatesView() throws
Exception {
Connection conn = DriverManager.getConnection(getUrl());
+ String fullTableName = generateUniqueTableName();
+ String viewName = generateUniqueViewName();
+ splitSystemCatalog(Lists.newArrayList(fullTableName, viewName));
+
String ddl = "CREATE TABLE " + fullTableName + " (k1 INTEGER NOT
NULL, k2 INTEGER NOT NULL, v1 DECIMAL, CONSTRAINT pk PRIMARY KEY (k1, k2))" +
tableDDLOptions;
conn.createStatement().execute(ddl);
- String viewName = "V_" + generateUniqueName();
ddl = "CREATE VIEW " + viewName + "(v2 VARCHAR, v3 VARCHAR) AS
SELECT * FROM " + fullTableName + " WHERE v1 = 1.0";
conn.createStatement().execute(ddl);
- try {
- conn.createStatement().execute("ALTER TABLE " + fullTableName
+ " DROP COLUMN v1");
- fail();
- } catch (SQLException e) {
-
assertEquals(SQLExceptionCode.CANNOT_MUTATE_TABLE.getErrorCode(),
e.getErrorCode());
+ conn.createStatement().execute("ALTER TABLE " + fullTableName + "
DROP COLUMN v1");
+ // TODO see if its possibel to prevent the dropping of a column
thats required by a child view (for its view where clause)
+ // the view should be invalid
--- End diff --
@JamesRTaylor
I think we can avoid this while dropping a column. However while adding a
column as the view and base table could be on different region servers we need
to detect and prevent a conflicting add column change happening at the same
time. I couldn't think of a better way to prevent this other than doing a
checkAndPut.
If we do the checkAndPut in MetadataClient to ensure that only one client
is able to add the same column at the same time and then make the rpc to the
server to add the column, do you think think that would scale?
---
