[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26233?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17449378#comment-17449378
]
Duo Zhang commented on HBASE-26233:
-----------------------------------
For enabling the feature by default on master, since I plan to also port this
feature to branch-2, we'd better keep it off by default, so the backport does
not need to change this flag. And then we open another issue to discuss whether
to enable it by default on master.
Thanks.
> The region replication framework should not be built upon the general
> replication framework
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-26233
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26233
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Umbrella
> Components: read replicas
> Reporter: Duo Zhang
> Assignee: Duo Zhang
> Priority: Major
>
> At least, at the source path, where we track the edits, we should not make
> region replication rely on general replication framework.
> The difficulty here for switching to a table based storage is that, the WAL
> system and replication system highly depend on each other. There will be
> cyclic dependency if we want to store replication peer and queue data in a
> hbase table.
> And after HBASE-18070, even meta wal provider will be integrated together
> with replication system, which makes things more difficult.
> But in general, for region replication, it is not a big deal to lose some
> edits, a flush can fix everything, which means we do not so heavy tracking
> system in the general replication system.
> We should find a more light-weighted way to do region replication.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.1#820001)
