[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-6580?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13501343#comment-13501343
 ] 

Gary Helmling commented on HBASE-6580:
--------------------------------------

bq. Maybe HConnection should just finally get a getTable(...) method.

+1.  Using HConnection to get an HTable seems more intuitive and more 
composable than our old monolithic HTable.  Lightweight HTables that are easily 
GC'd would also be very nice.  Agree that at that point we don't really need 
HTablePool.
                
> New HTable pool, based on HBase(byte[], HConnection, ExecutorService) 
> constructor
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-6580
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-6580
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>    Affects Versions: 0.92.2, 0.94.2
>            Reporter: Lars Hofhansl
>            Priority: Minor
>         Attachments: HBASE-6580_v1.patch
>
>
> Here I propose a very simple TablePool.
> It could be called LightHTablePool (or something - if you have a better name).
> Internally it would maintain an HConnection and an Executor service and each 
> invocation of getTable(...) would create a new HTable and close() would just 
> close it.
> In testing I find this more light weight than HTablePool and easier to 
> monitor in terms of resources used.
> It would hardly be more than a few dozen lines of code.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

Reply via email to