Just to be clear, Lu, for now stick to using a Scanner with the
RowIterator :)
It sounds like we might have to re-think how the RowIterator works with
the BatchScanner...
Christopher wrote:
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]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I use BatchScanner
在 2017年2月10日，11:24，Christopher <[email protected]
<mailto:[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]
<mailto:[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
