[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-15073?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15106236#comment-15106236
 ] 

stack commented on HBASE-15073:
-------------------------------

bq. ...different opinion on usefulness...

No.

The -1 is because no case was made for why we need this feature. Usually folks 
show up w/ some numbers or a graph or some reasoning as to why something is 
needed. In here there is none of that; there is 'certain use cases' that go 
unspecified and then when pushed, some rambling about ambari metrics server 
with no timelines or measure of what is being addressed or fit criteria as to 
what would make ambari-case happy.

> Finer grained control over normalization actions for RegionNormalizer
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-15073
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-15073
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Task
>          Components: regionserver
>            Reporter: Ted Yu
>            Assignee: Ted Yu
>         Attachments: 15073-v1.txt, 15073-v2.txt, 15073-v2.txt, 15073-v3.txt, 
> 15073-v4.txt, 15073-v5.txt
>
>
> Currently both region split and merge actions are carried out during 
> normalization for underlying table.
> However, for certain use case(s), it would be desirable to perform only one 
> type of action.
> There is one boolean flag, keyed by NORMALIZATION_ENABLED_KEY, per table that 
> enables normalization.
> To provide finer grained control, we have several options:
> 1. introduce another per table flag to indicate which type(s) of actions are 
> allowed ("N" for disabled, "S" for split only, "M" for merge only and "MS" 
> for both split and merge)
> 2. introduce another global flag to indicate which type(s) of actions are 
> allowed
> 3. modify the meaning of existing flag keyed by NORMALIZATION_ENABLED_KEY so 
> that it indicates type(s) of actions



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to