[jira] [Commented] (HIVE-12421) Streaming API TransactionBatch.beginNextTransaction() does not wait for locks
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-12421?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15010036#comment-15010036
]
Eugene Koifman commented on HIVE-12421:
---
you are right, lock() is a blocking call, so this isn't a problem.
> Streaming API TransactionBatch.beginNextTransaction() does not wait for locks
> -
>
> Key: HIVE-12421
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-12421
> Project: Hive
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: HCatalog, Transactions
>Affects Versions: 0.14.0
>Reporter: Eugene Koifman
>Assignee: Eugene Koifman
>
> TransactionBatchImpl.beginNextTransactionImpl() has
> {noformat}
> LockResponse res = msClient.lock(lockRequest);
> if (res.getState() != LockState.ACQUIRED) {
> throw new TransactionError("Unable to acquire lock on " + endPt);
> }
> {noformat}
> This means that if there are any competing locks already take, this will
> throw an Exception to client. This doesn't seem like the right behavior. It
> should block.
> We could also add TransactionBatch.beginNextTransaction(long timeoutMs) to
> give the client more control.
> cc [~alangates] [~sriharsha]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
[jira] [Commented] (HIVE-12421) Streaming API TransactionBatch.beginNextTransaction() does not wait for locks
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-12421?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15009724#comment-15009724
]
Roshan Naik commented on HIVE-12421:
I think the timeout should be set on the connection object as a property and
reused internally on all blocking calls to the backend.
.. instead of per method TransactionBatch.beginNextTransaction(long timeoutMs
> Streaming API TransactionBatch.beginNextTransaction() does not wait for locks
> -
>
> Key: HIVE-12421
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-12421
> Project: Hive
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: HCatalog, Transactions
>Affects Versions: 0.14.0
>Reporter: Eugene Koifman
>Assignee: Eugene Koifman
>
> TransactionBatchImpl.beginNextTransactionImpl() has
> {noformat}
> LockResponse res = msClient.lock(lockRequest);
> if (res.getState() != LockState.ACQUIRED) {
> throw new TransactionError("Unable to acquire lock on " + endPt);
> }
> {noformat}
> This means that if there are any competing locks already take, this will
> throw an Exception to client. This doesn't seem like the right behavior. It
> should block.
> We could also add TransactionBatch.beginNextTransaction(long timeoutMs) to
> give the client more control.
> cc [~alangates] [~sriharsha]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
[jira] [Commented] (HIVE-12421) Streaming API TransactionBatch.beginNextTransaction() does not wait for locks
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-12421?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15009713#comment-15009713
]
Roshan Naik commented on HIVE-12421:
I believe msClient.lock( ) itself is a blocking call.
The return value check is done as thats the mechanism of the msclient.lock()
api to indicate success.
It is definitely a good idea to provide a msClient.lock( timeout ) overload
for the API to invoke.
> Streaming API TransactionBatch.beginNextTransaction() does not wait for locks
> -
>
> Key: HIVE-12421
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-12421
> Project: Hive
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: HCatalog, Transactions
>Affects Versions: 0.14.0
>Reporter: Eugene Koifman
>Assignee: Eugene Koifman
>
> TransactionBatchImpl.beginNextTransactionImpl() has
> {noformat}
> LockResponse res = msClient.lock(lockRequest);
> if (res.getState() != LockState.ACQUIRED) {
> throw new TransactionError("Unable to acquire lock on " + endPt);
> }
> {noformat}
> This means that if there are any competing locks already take, this will
> throw an Exception to client. This doesn't seem like the right behavior. It
> should block.
> We could also add TransactionBatch.beginNextTransaction(long timeoutMs) to
> give the client more control.
> cc [~alangates] [~sriharsha]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
[jira] [Commented] (HIVE-12421) Streaming API TransactionBatch.beginNextTransaction() does not wait for locks
[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-12421?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15009159#comment-15009159
]
Alan Gates commented on HIVE-12421:
---
[~roshan_naik] can comment further, but I think the thinking was some writers
have no ability to buffer their inbound data, so blocking on a lock could force
them to drop data. We should change this to have the writer pass a maximum
wait time. If this code fails to obtain a lock in the allowed time then it can
throw an exception that makes clear what happened and let the writer decide
what to do from there.
> Streaming API TransactionBatch.beginNextTransaction() does not wait for locks
> -
>
> Key: HIVE-12421
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-12421
> Project: Hive
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: HCatalog, Transactions
>Affects Versions: 0.14.0
>Reporter: Eugene Koifman
>Assignee: Eugene Koifman
>
> TransactionBatchImpl.beginNextTransactionImpl() has
> {noformat}
> LockResponse res = msClient.lock(lockRequest);
> if (res.getState() != LockState.ACQUIRED) {
> throw new TransactionError("Unable to acquire lock on " + endPt);
> }
> {noformat}
> This means that if there are any competing locks already take, this will
> throw an Exception to client. This doesn't seem like the right behavior. It
> should block.
> We could also add TransactionBatch.beginNextTransaction(long timeoutMs) to
> give the client more control.
> cc [~alangates] [~sriharsha]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
