OK, got it. I missed the HRegionServers.next() in the mix. It calls
the RegionScanner.next(results) and that uses the batch. Tricksy! I
should have started on the client side instead.
Lars
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 3:08 AM, Ryan Rawson <ryano...@gmail.com> wrote:
> No, batch size when limit is set is 1. You get partial results for a route,
> then get more from the same row. Then the next row.
> On Nov 25, 2010 4:54 PM, "Lars George" <lars.geo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Mkay, I will look into it more for the latter. But for the limit this is
> still confusing to me as limit == batch and that is in he client side the
> number of rows. But not the number of columns. Does that mean if I had 100
> columns and set batch to 10 that it would only return 10 rows with 10
> columns but not what I would have expected ie. 10 rows with all columns? Is
> this implicitly mean batch is also the intra row batch size?
>>
>> Lars
>>
>> On Nov 25, 2010, at 21:53, Ryan Rawson <ryano...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> 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
>>>>
>
