[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-5627?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Geoffrey Jacoby updated PHOENIX-5627:
-------------------------------------
    Description: 
Using the IndexScrutinyTool, we recently saw a case where rows that had expired 
TTLs were flagged as "inconsistent", because they were seen in one side but not 
the other. This occurred during both data table -> index and index -> data 
table verification. Regardless of whether they were indeed inconsistent or not, 
they shouldn't be seen at all by the scrutiny tool. 

In all cases the expired rows were only recently expired (so likely not cleaned 
up yet by compaction.) 

Thanks, [~priyankporwal] for pointing this out. 

  was:
Using the IndexScrutinyTool, we recently saw a case where rows that had expired 
TTLs were flagged as "inconsistent", because they were seen in one side but not 
the other. This occurred during both data table -> index and index -> data 
table verification. Regardless of whether they were indeed inconsistent or not, 
they shouldn't be seen at all by the scrutiny tool. 

In all cases the expired rows were only recently expired (so likely not cleaned 
up yet by compaction.) 


> IndexScrutinyTool scrutinizes rows with expired TTLs
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: PHOENIX-5627
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-5627
>             Project: Phoenix
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Geoffrey Jacoby
>            Priority: Major
>
> Using the IndexScrutinyTool, we recently saw a case where rows that had 
> expired TTLs were flagged as "inconsistent", because they were seen in one 
> side but not the other. This occurred during both data table -> index and 
> index -> data table verification. Regardless of whether they were indeed 
> inconsistent or not, they shouldn't be seen at all by the scrutiny tool. 
> In all cases the expired rows were only recently expired (so likely not 
> cleaned up yet by compaction.) 
> Thanks, [~priyankporwal] for pointing this out. 



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)

Reply via email to