Hey Michael, If hbase-2037 will make it into 0.20.3, I am fine. If not, I would greatly appreciate you breaking it out for 0.20.3.
Thanks, Paul On Dec 15, 2009, at 10:28 PM, stack wrote: > Paul: > > I can apply the fix from hbase-2037... I can break it out of the posted > patch thats up there. Just say the word. > > St.Ack > > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 4:17 PM, Ram Kulbak <ram.kul...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Paul, >> >> I've encountered the same problem. I think its fixed as part of >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-2037 >> >> Regards, >> Yoram >> >> >> >> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Paul Ambrose <pambr...@mac.com> wrote: >> >>> I ran into some problems with FilterList and SingleColumnValueFilter. >>> >>> I created a FilterList with MUST_PASS_ONE and two >> SingleColumnValueFilters >>> (each testing equality on a different columns) and query some trivial >> data: >>> >>> http://pastie.org/744890 >>> >>> The problem that I encountered were two-fold: >>> >>> SingleColumnValueFilter.filterKeyValues() returns ReturnCode.INCLUDE >>> if the column names do not match. If FilterList is employed, then when >> the >>> first Filter returns INCLUDE (because the column names do not match), no >>> more filters for that KeyValue are evaluated. That is problematic >> because >>> when filterRow() is finally called for those filters, matchedColumn is >>> never >>> found to be true because they were not invoked (due to FilterList exiting >>> from >>> the filterList iteration when the name mismatched INCLUDE was returned). >>> The fix (at least for this scenario) is for >>> SingleColumnValueFilter.filterKeyValues() to >>> return ReturnCode.NEXT_ROW (rather than INCLUDE). >>> >>> The second problem is at the bottom of FilterList.filterKeyValue() >>> where ReturnCode.SKIP is returned if MUST_PASS_ONE is the operator, >>> rather than always returning ReturnCode.INCLUDE and then leaving the >>> final filter decision to be made by the call to filterRow(). I am sure >>> there is a good >>> reason for returning SKIP in other scenarios, but it is problematic in >>> mine. >>> >>> Feedback would be much appreciated. >>> >>> Paul >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>
