[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-14521?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14948483#comment-14948483
]
Hadoop QA commented on HBASE-14521:
-----------------------------------
{color:green}+1 overall{color}. Here are the results of testing the latest
attachment
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12765535/HBASE-14521_v3.patch
against master branch at commit 7e30436e3fa84525b85b05b9e23cb01b2ada7c12.
ATTACHMENT ID: 12765535
{color:green}+1 @author{color}. The patch does not contain any @author
tags.
{color:green}+1 tests included{color}. The patch appears to include 9 new
or modified tests.
{color:green}+1 hadoop versions{color}. The patch compiles with all
supported hadoop versions (2.4.0 2.4.1 2.5.0 2.5.1 2.5.2 2.6.0 2.6.1 2.7.0
2.7.1)
{color:green}+1 javac{color}. The applied patch does not increase the
total number of javac compiler warnings.
{color:green}+1 protoc{color}. The applied patch does not increase the
total number of protoc compiler warnings.
{color:green}+1 javadoc{color}. The javadoc tool did not generate any
warning messages.
{color:green}+1 checkstyle{color}. The applied patch does not increase the
total number of checkstyle errors
{color:green}+1 findbugs{color}. The patch does not introduce any new
Findbugs (version 2.0.3) warnings.
{color:green}+1 release audit{color}. The applied patch does not increase
the total number of release audit warnings.
{color:green}+1 lineLengths{color}. The patch does not introduce lines
longer than 100
{color:green}+1 site{color}. The mvn post-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/15914//testReport/
Release Findbugs (version 2.0.3) warnings:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/15914//artifact/patchprocess/newFindbugsWarnings.html
Checkstyle Errors:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/15914//artifact/patchprocess/checkstyle-aggregate.html
Console output:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/15914//console
This message is automatically generated.
> Unify the semantic of hbase.client.retries.number
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-14521
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-14521
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 0.98.14, 1.1.2
> Reporter: Yu Li
> Assignee: Yu Li
> Fix For: 2.0.0, 1.3.0
>
> Attachments: HBASE-14521.patch, HBASE-14521_v2.patch,
> HBASE-14521_v3.patch
>
>
> From name of the _hbase.client.retries.number_ property, it should be the
> number of maximum *retries*, or say if we set the property to 1, there should
> be 2 attempts in total. However, there're two different semantics when using
> it in current code base.
> For example, in ConnectionImplementation#locateRegionInMeta:
> {code}
> int localNumRetries = (retry ? numTries : 1);
> for (int tries = 0; true; tries++) {
> if (tries >= localNumRetries) {
> throw new NoServerForRegionException("Unable to find region for "
> + Bytes.toStringBinary(row) + " in " + tableName +
> " after " + numTries + " tries.");
> }
> {code}
> the retries number is regarded as max times for *tries*
> While in RpcRetryingCallerImpl#callWithRetries:
> {code}
> for (int tries = 0;; tries++) {
> long expectedSleep;
> try {
> callable.prepare(tries != 0); // if called with false, check table
> status on ZK
> interceptor.intercept(context.prepare(callable, tries));
> return callable.call(getRemainingTime(callTimeout));
> } catch (PreemptiveFastFailException e) {
> throw e;
> } catch (Throwable t) {
> ...
> if (tries >= retries - 1) {
> throw new RetriesExhaustedException(tries, exceptions);
> }
> {code}
> it's regarded as exactly for *REtry* (try a call first with no condition and
> then check whether to retry or exceeds maximum retry number)
> This inconsistency will cause misunderstanding in usage, such as one of our
> customer set the property to zero expecting one single call but finally
> received NoServerForRegionException.
> We should unify the semantic of the property, and I suggest to keep the
> original one for retry rather than total tries.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
