I suspected that was the case. BatchScanner does not guarantee ordering of entries, which is needed for the behavior you're expecting with RowIterator. This means that the RowIterator could see the same row multiple times with different subsets of the row's columns. This is probably affecting your count.
On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 10:29 PM Lu Q <[email protected]> wrote: > I use BatchScanner > > 在 2017年2月10日，11:24，Christopher <[email protected]> 写道： > > Does it matter if your scanner is a BatchScanner or a Scanner? > I wonder if this is due to the way BatchScanner could split rows up. > > On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 9:50 PM Lu Q <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I use accumulo 1.8.0,and I develop a ORM framework for conversion the scan > result to a object. > > Before,I use Rowiterator because it faster than direct to use scan > > RowIterator rows = new RowIterator(scan); > rows.forEachRemaining(rowIterator -> { > while (rowIterator.hasNext()) { > Map.Entry<Key, Value> entry = rowIterator.next(); > ... > } > } > > it works ok until I query 1000+ once .I found that when the range size > bigger then 1000,some data miss. > I think maybe I conversion it error ,so I change it to a map struct ,the > row_id as the map key ,and other as the map value ,the problem still exists. > > Then I not use RowIterator,it works ok. > for (Map.Entry<Key, Value> entry : scan) { > ... > } > > > Is the bug or my program error ? > Thanks. > > -- > Christopher > > > -- Christopher
