[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-13286?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14369735#comment-14369735 ]
Nicolas Liochon commented on HBASE-13286: ----------------------------------------- bq. Good catch. Not really, it's me who put it a while ago (to fix the infinite timeout), and I've been questioning myself about this for a while. :-) bq. Why remove MIN_RPC_TIMEOUT though? Why not just set it to 1 instead of 2000? I thought it would make the code simpler to read. As you like, I can change it. For the stack during the tests: org.apache.oozie.test.MiniHCatServer$1.run(MiniHCatServer.java:137) It's because H10 is configured to run two builds in parallel, and this is looking for trouble. We ran with a oozie build. >From what I see the findbug is already not from me. I will commit tomorrow my time if there is no objection. > Minimum timeout for a rpc call could be 1 ms instead of 2 seconds > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: HBASE-13286 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-13286 > Project: HBase > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: Client > Affects Versions: 1.0.0, 0.98.12 > Reporter: Nicolas Liochon > Assignee: Nicolas Liochon > Priority: Minor > Fix For: 1.1.0 > > Attachments: 13286.patch > > > There is a check in the client to be sure that we don't use a timeout of zero > (i.e. infinite). This includes setting the minimal time out for a rpc timeout > to 2 seconds. However, it makes sense for some calls (typically gets going to > the cache) to have much lower timeouts. So it's better to do the check vs. > zero but with a minimal timeout of 1. > I fixed a typo & a wrong comment in this patch as well. I don't understand > this code: > {code} > // t could be a RemoteException so go around again. > translateException(t); // We don't use the result? > {code} > but may be it's good. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)