[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IMPALA-12902?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Csaba Ringhofer updated IMPALA-12902:
-------------------------------------
Summary: Event replication can be broken if
hms_event_incremental_refresh_transactional_table=false (was: Event
replication is can be broken if
hms_event_incremental_refresh_transactional_table=false)
> Event replication can be broken if
> hms_event_incremental_refresh_transactional_table=false
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: IMPALA-12902
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IMPALA-12902
> Project: IMPALA
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Catalog
> Reporter: Csaba Ringhofer
> Priority: Major
>
> when setting hms_event_incremental_refresh_transactional_table=false
> metadata.test_event_processing.TestEventProcessing.test_event_based_replication
> fails at the following assert:
> [https://github.com/apache/impala/blob/6c0c26146d956ad771cee27283c1371b9c23adce/tests/metadata/test_event_processing_base.py#L234]
>
> Based on the logs catalogd only sees alter_database and transaction events in
> this case, so if the transaction events (COMMIT_TXN) are ignore, then it
> doesn't detect the change in the table.
> This seems strange as the commit that added the test is older than the one
> that added hms_event_incremental_refresh_transactional_table
> [https://github.com/apache/impala/commit/e53d649f8a88f42a70237fe7c2663baa126fed1a]
> vs
> [https://github.com/apache/impala/commit/097b10104f23e0927d5b21b43a79f6cc10425f59]
>
> So it is not clear to me how could the test pass originally. One possibility
> is that different events were generated in HMS at that time.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-all-unsubscr...@impala.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-all-h...@impala.apache.org
