limit is for retrieving partial results of a row. Ie: give me a row
in chunks. Filters that want to operate on the entire row cannot be
used with this mode. i forget why it's in the loop but there was a
good reason at the time.
-ryan
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 10:51 AM, Lars George <lars.geo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Does hbase-dev still get forwarded? Did you see the below message?
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Lars George <lars.geo...@gmail.com>
> Date: Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 4:25 PM
> Subject: HRegion.RegionScanner.nextInternal()
> To: hbase-...@hadoop.apache.org
>
> Hi,
>
> I am officially confused:
>
> byte [] nextRow;
> do {
> this.storeHeap.next(results, limit - results.size());
> if (limit > 0 && results.size() == limit) {
> if (this.filter != null && filter.hasFilterRow()) throw
> new IncompatibleFilterException(
> "Filter with filterRow(List<KeyValue>) incompatible
> with scan with limit!");
> return true; // we are expecting more yes, but also
> limited to how many we can return.
> }
> } while (Bytes.equals(currentRow, nextRow = peekRow()));
>
> This is from the nextInternal() call. Questions:
>
> a) Why is that check for the filter and limit both being set inside the loop?
>
> b) if "limit" is the batch size (which for a Get is "-1", not "1" as I
> would have thought) then what does that "limit - results.size()"
> achieve?
>
> I mean, this loops gets all columns for a given row, so batch/limit
> should not be handled here, right? what if limit were set to "1" by
> the client? Then even if the Get had 3 columns to retrieve it would
> not be able to since this limit makes it bail out. So there would be
> multiple calls to nextInternal() to complete what could be done in one
> loop?
>
> Eh?
>
> Lars
>
