[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8763?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14010682#comment-14010682 ]
Hadoop QA commented on HBASE-8763: ---------------------------------- {color:red}-1 overall{color}. Here are the results of testing the latest attachment http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12647028/hbase-8763-v5.patch against trunk revision . ATTACHMENT ID: 12647028 {color:green}+1 @author{color}. The patch does not contain any @author tags. {color:green}+1 tests included{color}. The patch appears to include 12 new or modified tests. {color:green}+1 javac{color}. The applied patch does not increase the total number of javac compiler warnings. {color:green}+1 javadoc{color}. The javadoc tool did not generate any warning messages. {color:green}+1 findbugs{color}. The patch does not introduce any new Findbugs (version 1.3.9) warnings. {color:red}-1 release audit{color}. The applied patch generated 31 release audit warnings (more than the trunk's current 0 warnings). {color:green}+1 lineLengths{color}. The patch does not introduce lines longer than 100 {color:green}+1 site{color}. The mvn site goal succeeds with this patch. {color:green}+1 core tests{color}. The patch passed unit tests in . Test results: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9610//testReport/ Release audit warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9610//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/patchReleaseAuditProblems.txt Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9610//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-examples.html Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9610//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-hadoop-compat.html Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9610//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-prefix-tree.html Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9610//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-thrift.html Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9610//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-server.html Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9610//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-client.html Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9610//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-hadoop2-compat.html Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9610//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-common.html Findbugs warnings: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9610//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-protocol.html Console output: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/9610//console This message is automatically generated. > [BRAINSTORM] Combine MVCC and SeqId > ----------------------------------- > > Key: HBASE-8763 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8763 > Project: HBase > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: regionserver > Reporter: Enis Soztutar > Assignee: Jeffrey Zhong > Priority: Critical > Attachments: HBase MVCC & LogSeqId Combined.pdf, > hbase-8736-poc.patch, hbase-8763-poc-v1.patch, hbase-8763-v1.patch, > hbase-8763-v2.patch, hbase-8763-v3.patch, hbase-8763-v4.patch, > hbase-8763-v5.patch, hbase-8763_wip1.patch > > > HBASE-8701 and a lot of recent issues include good discussions about mvcc + > seqId semantics. It seems that having mvcc and the seqId complicates the > comparator semantics a lot in regards to flush + WAL replay + compactions + > delete markers and out of order puts. > Thinking more about it I don't think we need a MVCC write number which is > different than the seqId. We can keep the MVCC semantics, read point and > smallest read points intact, but combine mvcc write number and seqId. This > will allow cleaner semantics + implementation + smaller data files. > We can do some brainstorming for 0.98. We still have to verify that this > would be semantically correct, it should be so by my current understanding. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.2#6252)