[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-2670?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12878798#action_12878798
]
HBase Review Board commented on HBASE-2670:
-------------------------------------------
Message from: "Todd Lipcon" <t...@cloudera.com>
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://review.hbase.org/r/180/
-----------------------------------------------------------
Review request for hbase and Ryan Rawson.
Summary
-------
This changes the memstore comparator, improves the atomicity tests, and also
fixes ICV to continue to have the right behavior even with the comparator
change.
This addresses bug hbase-2670.
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/hbase-2670
Diffs
-----
src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/KeyValue.java 71284cf
src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/regionserver/Store.java 2a0dcee
src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/MultithreadedTestUtil.java 7c062d7
src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/TestAcidGuarantees.java 75f3c8b
src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/regionserver/TestMemStore.java 9833d76
src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/regionserver/TestStoreScanner.java
0566af7
Diff: http://review.hbase.org/r/180/diff
Testing
-------
Unit tests.
Thanks,
Todd
> MemStore should retain multiple KVs with the same timestamp when memstoreTS
> differs
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-2670
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-2670
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: regionserver
> Affects Versions: 0.20.5, 0.21.0
> Reporter: Todd Lipcon
> Assignee: Todd Lipcon
> Priority: Blocker
> Attachments: hbase-2670.txt
>
>
> There appears to be a bug in HBASE-2248 as committed to trunk. See following
> failing test:
> http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/HBase-TRUNK/1296/testReport/junit/org.apache.hadoop.hbase/TestAcidGuarantees/testAtomicity/
> Think this is the same bug we saw early on in 2248 in the 0.20 branch, looks
> like the fix didn't make it over.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
