[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-14355?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14975201#comment-14975201
]
churro morales commented on HBASE-14355:
----------------------------------------
[~stack] I agree, that makes things a lot cleaner. My original thoughts were
to pass the Store into the constructor of StoreFileScanner which ended up being
pretty invasive since we didn't have access to the store at construction time.
But parameterizing method is cleaner, good call.
Now that we have the Store being passed to StoreFileScanner.shouldUseScanner()
we can get rid of the SortedSet<byte[]> columns parameter to that method and
just grab the columns from the Scan's familyMap since we have knowledge about
the columnFamily - which is another added bonus.
We are definitely going to use this patch on our cluster which is running 98x
and if you guys are interested in a backport, I can provide the patches for 1.x
and 98x as well.
I'll create a new patch with the change you suggested as well as removing the
"columns" parameter from shouldUseScanner()
> Scan different TimeRange for each column family
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-14355
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-14355
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: Client, regionserver, Scanners
> Reporter: Dave Latham
> Assignee: churro morales
> Fix For: 2.0.0, 1.3.0, 0.98.16
>
> Attachments: HBASE-14355-v1.patch, HBASE-14355-v2.patch,
> HBASE-14355.patch
>
>
> At present the Scan API supports only table level time range. We have
> specific use cases that will benefit from per column family time range. (See
> background discussion at
> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hbase-user/201508.mbox/%3ccaa4mzom00ef5eoxstk0hetxeby8mqss61gbvgttgpaspmhq...@mail.gmail.com%3E)
> There are a couple of choices that would be good to validate. First - how to
> update the Scan API to support family and table level updates. One proposal
> would be to add Scan.setTimeRange(byte family, long minTime, long maxTime),
> then store it in a Map<byte[], TimeRange>. When executing the scan, if a
> family has a specified TimeRange, then use it, otherwise fall back to using
> the table level TimeRange. Clients using the new API against old region
> servers would not get the families correctly filterd. Old clients sending
> scans to new region servers would work correctly.
> The other question is how to get StoreFileScanner.shouldUseScanner to match
> up the proper family and time range. It has the Scan available but doesn't
> currently have available which family it is a part of. One option would be
> to try to pass down the column family in each constructor path. Another
> would be to instead alter shouldUseScanner to pass down the specific
> TimeRange to use (similar to how it currently passes down the columns to use
> which also appears to be a workaround for not having the family available).
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
