[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5104?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13255008#comment-13255008
 ] 

Hadoop QA commented on HBASE-5104:
----------------------------------

-1 overall.  Here are the results of testing the latest attachment 
  
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12522843/jira-HBASE-5104-Provide-a-reliable-intra-row-paginat-2012-04-16_12_39_42.patch
  against trunk revision .

    +1 @author.  The patch does not contain any @author tags.

    +1 tests included.  The patch appears to include 11 new or modified tests.

    +1 javadoc.  The javadoc tool did not generate any warning messages.

    +1 javac.  The applied patch does not increase the total number of javac 
compiler warnings.

    -1 findbugs.  The patch appears to introduce 4 new Findbugs (version 1.3.9) 
warnings.

    +1 release audit.  The applied patch does not increase the total number of 
release audit warnings.

     -1 core tests.  The patch failed these unit tests:
     

Test results: 
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/1541//testReport/
Findbugs warnings: 
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/1541//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarnings.html
Console output: 
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/1541//console

This message is automatically generated.
                
> Provide a reliable intra-row pagination mechanism
> -------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-5104
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5104
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Kannan Muthukkaruppan
>            Assignee: Madhuwanti Vaidya
>         Attachments: D2799.1.patch, D2799.2.patch, D2799.3.patch, 
> jira-HBASE-5104-Provide-a-reliable-intra-row-paginat-2012-04-16_12_39_42.patch,
>  testFilterList.rb
>
>
> Addendum:
> Doing pagination (retrieving at most "limit" number of KVs at a particular 
> "offset") is currently supported via the ColumnPaginationFilter. However, it 
> is not a very clean way of supporting pagination.  Some of the problems with 
> it are:
> * Normally, one would expect a query with (Filter(A) AND Filter(B)) to have 
> same results as (query with Filter(A)) INTERSECT (query with Filter(B)). This 
> is not the case for ColumnPaginationFilter as its internal state gets updated 
> depending on whether or not Filter(A) returns TRUE/FALSE for a particular 
> cell.
> * When this Filter is used in combination with other filters (e.g., doing AND 
> with another filter using FilterList), the behavior of the query depends on 
> the order of filters in the FilterList. This is not ideal.
> * ColumnPaginationFilter is a stateful filter which ends up counting multiple 
> versions of the cell as separate values even if another filter upstream or 
> the ScanQueryMatcher is going to reject the value for other reasons.
> Seems like we need a reliable way to do pagination. The particular use case 
> that prompted this JIRA is pagination within the same rowKey. For example, 
> for a given row key R, get columns with prefix P, starting at offset X (among 
> columns which have prefix P) and limit Y. Some possible fixes might be:
> 1) enhance ColumnPrefixFilter to support another constructor which supports 
> limit/offset.
> 2) Support pagination (limit/offset) at the Scan/Get API level (rather than 
> as a filter) [Like SQL].
> Original Post:
> Thanks Jiakai Liu for reporting this issue and doing the initial 
> investigation. Email from Jiakai below:
> Assuming that we have an index column family with the following entries:
> "tag0:001:thread1"
> ...
> "tag1:001:thread1"
> "tag1:002:thread2"
> ...
> "tag1:010:thread10"
> ...
> "tag2:001:thread1"
> "tag2:005:thread5"
> ...
> To get threads with "tag1" in range [5, 10), I tried the following code:
>     ColumnPrefixFilter filter1 = new 
> ColumnPrefixFilter(Bytes.toBytes("tag1"));
>     ColumnPaginationFilter filter2 = new ColumnPaginationFilter(5 /* limit 
> */, 5 /* offset */);
>     FilterList filters = new FilterList(Operator.MUST_PASS_ALL);
>     filters.addFilter(filter1);
>     filters.addFilter(filter2);
>     Get get = new Get(USER);
>     get.addFamily(COLUMN_FAMILY);
>     get.setMaxVersions(1);
>     get.setFilter(filters);
> Somehow it didn't work as expected. It returned the entries as if the filter1 
> were not set.
> Turns out the ColumnPrefixFilter returns SEEK_NEXT_USING_HINT in some cases. 
> The FilterList filter does not handle this return code properly (treat it as 
> INCLUDE).

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

Reply via email to