[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-3276?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12965900#action_12965900
 ] 

Kannan Muthukkaruppan commented on HBASE-3276:
----------------------------------------------

On flushes, if we did what a minor compaction now does (after HBASE-3048), i.e. 
process TTL/versions/overwrites etc. then a HFile would never contain a value 
that should be suppressed.

And with regards to multiple HFiles containing conflicting data (i.e. 
corresponding to same TS), we could pick the "sequenceId" of the HFile to 
resolve the winner. (HBASE-1485 fix also relies on sequenceId ordering of 
HFiles to resolve winners between entries coming from multiple files).


> delete followed by a put with the same timestamp
> ------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-3276
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-3276
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Kannan Muthukkaruppan
>            Assignee: Kannan Muthukkaruppan
>
> [Note: This issue is relevant only for cases that don't use the default 
> "time" based versions, but provide/manage versions explicitly.]
> The fix for HBASE-1485 ensures that if there are multiple puts with the same 
> timestamp the later one wins.
> However, if there is a delete for a specific timestamp, then the later put 
> doesn't win. 
> Say for example the following is the sequence of operations:
> put                         row/col/v1 - value1
> deleteColumn     row/col/v1
> put                         row/col/v1 - value2
> Without the deleteColumn(), HBASE-1485 ensures that "value2" is the winner.
> However, with the deleteColumn() thrown into the mix, the delete wins, and 
> one cannot insert a new value at that version. [The only, unsatisfactory, 
> workaround at this point seems to be trigger a major compaction. The major 
> compact would clear the delete marker, and allow new cells to be created with 
> that version again.] 
> ---
> Seems like it might not be too complicated to extend the fix for HBASE-1485 
> to also respect ordering between delete/put operations. I'll look into this 
> further.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply via email to