virajjasani commented on a change in pull request #2454: URL: https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/2454#discussion_r500199740
########## File path: hbase-server/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/master/normalizer/SimpleRegionNormalizer.java ########## @@ -371,7 +358,11 @@ private boolean skipForMerge(final RegionStates regionStates, final RegionInfo r final long nextSizeMb = getRegionSizeMB(next); // always merge away empty regions when they present themselves. if (currentSizeMb == 0 || nextSizeMb == 0 || currentSizeMb + nextSizeMb < avgRegionSizeMb) { - plans.add(new MergeNormalizationPlan(current, next)); + final MergeNormalizationPlan plan = new MergeNormalizationPlan.Builder() + .addTarget(current, currentSizeMb) + .addTarget(next, nextSizeMb) Review comment: Sure this is not normalizer's job to validate but by keeping target regions as list, we do have a probability of keeping odd no of regions around a while just to get them abandoned later by `MergeTableRegionsProcedure#checkRegionsToMerge` if we keep it unbounded list. Not that `SimpleRegionNormalizer` will add odd no of regions, this is just to be treated as a probability. How about `List<Pair<NormalizerRegionInfo, NormalizerRegionInfo>>` as target regions in `MergeNormalizationPlan`? New POJO `NormalizerRegionInfo` can just contain `regionInfo` and `regionSize`. Or `List<MergeNormalizerRegionInfo>` where `MergeNormalizerRegionInfo` can keep `firstRegion` and `secondRegion` just like how it was before but this time we can have list of that object. This way, at least we indicate a clear way for clients to send list of pair of regions to merge. Thought? ---------------------------------------------------------------- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org