Re: Nondeterministic outcome based on cell TTL and major compaction event order

2015-04-21 Thread Michael Segel
- just >>>> optimizations that run in the background to prevent the number of >> HFiles to >>>> be unbounded. >>>>>> In this case the schedule of the compactions influences the outcome. >>>>>> >>>>>> Note that even tom

Re: Nondeterministic outcome based on cell TTL and major compaction event order

2015-04-20 Thread Anoop John
> >>>> 1. delete (r1, f1, q1, T2) > >>>> 2. put (r1, f1, q1, v1, T1) > >>>> > >>>> If a compaction happens after #1 but before #2 the put will remain: > >>>> delete > >>>> compaction > >>>> put (re

Re: Nondeterministic outcome based on cell TTL and major compaction event order

2015-04-20 Thread Michael Segel
>>> If the compaction happens after #2 the put will be affected by the >> delete and hence removed: >>>> delete >>>> put >>>> compaction (will remove the put) >>>> >>>> Notice though that both of these examples _are_

Re: Nondeterministic outcome based on cell TTL and major compaction event order

2015-04-19 Thread Anoop John
delete > >> put > >> compaction (will remove the put) > >> > >> Notice though that both of these examples _are_ a bit weird. > >> Why would only a newer version of the cell have a TTL? > >> Why would you date a delete into the future? > >>

Re: Nondeterministic outcome based on cell TTL and major compaction event order

2015-04-19 Thread Michael Segel
f1, q1, T2)2. put (r1, f1, q1, v1, T1) >> If a compaction happens after #1 but before #2 the put will >> remain:deletecompactionput (remains visible) >> >> If the compaction happens after #2 the put will be affected by the delete >> and hence removed.deleteput

Re: Nondeterministic outcome based on cell TTL and major compaction event order

2015-04-18 Thread Michael Segel
te and > hence removed.deleteputcompaction (will remove the put) > > Notice though that both of these examples _are_ a bit weird.Why would only a > newer version of the cell have a TTL?Why would you date a delete into the > future? > -- Lars > > From: Sean Busbey &

Re: Nondeterministic outcome based on cell TTL and major compaction event order

2015-04-18 Thread Michael Segel
I said barring max versions… (in an earlier post on the thread.) > On Apr 17, 2015, at 6:52 PM, Sean Busbey wrote: > > If you have max versions set to 1 (the default), then c1 should be removed > at compaction time if c2 still exists then. > > -- > Sean > On Apr 17, 2015 6:41 PM, "Michael Seg

Re: Nondeterministic outcome based on cell TTL and major compaction event order

2015-04-17 Thread lars hofhansl
cell have a TTL? Why would you date a delete into the future? -- Lars From: lars hofhansl To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" Sent: Friday, April 17, 2015 10:18 PM Subject: Re: Nondeterministic outcome based on cell TTL and major compaction event order Ju

Re: Nondeterministic outcome based on cell TTL and major compaction event order

2015-04-17 Thread lars hofhansl
Lars From: Sean Busbey To: dev Sent: Friday, April 17, 2015 4:52 PM Subject: Re: Nondeterministic outcome based on cell TTL and major compaction event order If you have max versions set to 1 (the default), then c1 should be removed at compaction time if c2 still exists then. -- Sean O

Re: Nondeterministic outcome based on cell TTL and major compaction event order

2015-04-17 Thread Sean Busbey
If you have max versions set to 1 (the default), then c1 should be removed at compaction time if c2 still exists then. -- Sean On Apr 17, 2015 6:41 PM, "Michael Segel" wrote: > Ok, > So then if you have a previous cell (c1) and you insert a new cell c2 that > has a TTL of lets say 5 mins, then

Re: Nondeterministic outcome based on cell TTL and major compaction event order

2015-04-17 Thread Michael Segel
Ok, So then if you have a previous cell (c1) and you insert a new cell c2 that has a TTL of lets say 5 mins, then c1 should always exist? That is my understanding but from Cosmin’s post, he’s saying its different. And that’s why I don’t understand. You couldn’t lose the cell c1 at all. Compa

Re: Nondeterministic outcome based on cell TTL and major compaction event order

2015-04-17 Thread Andrew Purtell
The way TTLs work today is they define the interval of time a cell exists - exactly as that. There is no tombstone laid like a normal delete. Once the TTL elapses the cell just ceases to exist to normal scanners. The interaction of expired cells, multiple versions, minimum versions, raw scanners, e

Re: Nondeterministic outcome based on cell TTL and major compaction event order

2015-04-17 Thread Michael Segel
com/bending-time-in-hbase/ ) >>> TTL expirations don't result in deletes (at least not in the classical >> sense with a tombstone). >>> >>> Cosmin >>> >>> ___ >>> From: Michael Segel >>>

Re: Nondeterministic outcome based on cell TTL and major compaction event order

2015-04-17 Thread Jean-Marc Spaggiari
(at least not in the classical > sense with a tombstone). > > > > Cosmin > > > > _______________________ > > From: Michael Segel > > Sent: Friday, April 10, 2015 8:35 AM > > To: dev@hbase.apache.org > > Subject: Re: Nondeterminist

Re: Nondeterministic outcome based on cell TTL and major compaction event order

2015-04-17 Thread Michael Segel
__ > From: Michael Segel > Sent: Friday, April 10, 2015 8:35 AM > To: dev@hbase.apache.org > Subject: Re: Nondeterministic outcome based on cell TTL and major compaction > event order > > Interesting. > There seems to be some ambiguity in wha

Re: Nondeterministic outcome based on cell TTL and major compaction event order

2015-04-13 Thread Cosmin Lehene
inistic outcome based on cell TTL and major compaction event order Interesting. There seems to be some ambiguity in what happens between a TTL and a deletion. Is the TTL a delete or is it a separate type of function? That is to say when you inserted version 2 of the cell, did you intend to just