Again, it depends on how you abort and 'idempotent' can have different definitions.
For example, even if you are only concerned about read, there are resources on the HRegion that the read touches or acquires (scanner, lock, mvcc etc) that hopefully will be cleaned/releases with the abort. Or you may have it in a bad/inconsistent state. Thanks. Jerry On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 7:14 PM, 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think this depends on how you model the problem. At server side, if you > re-execute a read operation with a new mvcc, then you may read a value that > should not be visible if you use the old mvcc. If you define this as an > error then I think there will be conflicts. > > But at client side, there is guarantee that the request you send first will > be executed first. So as long as the read request does not return, I think > it is OK to read a value which is written by a write request which is sent > after the read request? > > Thanks. > > 2017-04-10 9:52 GMT+08:00 杨苏立 Yang Su Li <yangs...@gmail.com>: > > > We are only concerned about read operations here. Are you suggesting they > > are completely idempotent? > > Are there any read-after-write conflicts? > > > > Thanks > > > > Sui > > > > On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 8:48 PM, 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > It depends on how you about the rpc request. For hbase, there will be > no > > > write conflict, but a write operation can only be finished iff all the > > > write operations with a lower mvcc number have been finished. So if you > > > just stop a write operation without recovering the mvcc(I do not know > how > > > to recover but I think you need to something...) then the writes will > be > > > stuck. > > > > > > And one more thing, for read operation you may interrupt it at any > time, > > > but for write operation, I do not think you can re-execute it with a > new > > > mvcc number if the WAL entry has already been flushed out. That means, > > the > > > re-execution process will be different if you about the write operation > > at > > > different stages. > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > 2017-04-10 6:47 GMT+08:00 杨苏立 Yang Su Li <yangs...@gmail.com>: > > > > > > > We are trying to implement speculative rpc handling for our > workloads. > > So > > > > we want allow RPC Handler to stop executing an RPC call, put it back > to > > > the > > > > queue, and later re-execute it. > > > > > > > > If at time t1, we execute and RPC call half way, aborts, and put the > > call > > > > back to the queue. > > > > Then at time t2 another RPC handler picks the call and re-execute it. > > > > I understand that we might get a different mvcc number and different > > > > results at t2 compared to we execute it at t1. > > > > My question is that: would this situation any different compared to > the > > > > situation where the call was never executed at t1, and is executed at > > t2 > > > > for the first time. > > > > > > > > > > > > My guess is that since at t1 we may already gotten an mvcc number, so > > it > > > > might potentially cause some write conflicts and certain write > > operations > > > > to retry. But correctness wise, is there any difference? > > > > > > > > Thanks a lot! > > > > > > > > Suli > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 5:14 PM, Jerry He <jerry...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > I don't know what your intention and your context are. > > > > > > > > > > You may get a different mvcc number and get different results next > > time > > > > > around if there are concurrent writes. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > Jerry > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 12:48 PM 杨苏立 Yang Su Li <yangs...@gmail.com > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > I am wondering, for read requests like Get/MultiGet/Scan, is the > > RPC > > > > > > handling idempotent in HBase? > > > > > > > > > > > > More specifically, if in the middle of RPC handling we stop the > > > > handling > > > > > > threads, puts the RPC call back to the queue, and later another > RPC > > > > > Handler > > > > > > picks up this call and starts all over again, will the result be > > the > > > > same > > > > > > as if this call is being handled for the first time now? Or are > > their > > > > any > > > > > > unexpected side effects? > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > > Suli > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Suli Yang > > > > > > > > > > > > Department of Physics > > > > > > University of Wisconsin Madison > > > > > > > > > > > > 4257 Chamberlin Hall > > > > > > Madison WI 53703 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Suli Yang > > > > > > > > Department of Physics > > > > University of Wisconsin Madison > > > > > > > > 4257 Chamberlin Hall > > > > Madison WI 53703 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Suli Yang > > > > Department of Physics > > University of Wisconsin Madison > > > > 4257 Chamberlin Hall > > Madison WI 53703 > > >
