[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-9465?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15315538#comment-15315538
]
Ted Yu commented on HBASE-9465:
-------------------------------
HBASE-15883 introduced hbase:replication table.
Can we use hbase:replication instead of hbase:meta for bookkeeping ?
> HLog entries are not pushed to peer clusters serially when region-move or RS
> failure in master cluster
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-9465
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-9465
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: regionserver, Replication
> Reporter: Honghua Feng
> Assignee: Phil Yang
>
> When region-move or RS failure occurs in master cluster, the hlog entries
> that are not pushed before region-move or RS-failure will be pushed by
> original RS(for region move) or another RS which takes over the remained hlog
> of dead RS(for RS failure), and the new entries for the same region(s) will
> be pushed by the RS which now serves the region(s), but they push the hlog
> entries of a same region concurrently without coordination.
> This treatment can possibly lead to data inconsistency between master and
> peer clusters:
> 1. there are put and then delete written to master cluster
> 2. due to region-move / RS-failure, they are pushed by different
> replication-source threads to peer cluster
> 3. if delete is pushed to peer cluster before put, and flush and
> major-compact occurs in peer cluster before put is pushed to peer cluster,
> the delete is collected and the put remains in peer cluster
> In this scenario, the put remains in peer cluster, but in master cluster the
> put is masked by the delete, hence data inconsistency between master and peer
> clusters
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
