[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-1835?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14499155#comment-14499155
 ] 

Thomas D'Silva commented on PHOENIX-1835:
-----------------------------------------

[~jamestaylor]

TransactionAwareHTable encodes the transaction and sets it as an attribute on 
the scan and TransactionProcessor.preScannerOpen sets the time range of the 
scan based on the oldest and latest timestamp of the transaction. So even if we 
set the timestamp in PostDDLCompiler it is not used. 
Would we still need to translate the mutation time from MetaDataMutationResult 
returned by the server?

> Adjust MetaDataEndPointImpl timestamps if table is transactional
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: PHOENIX-1835
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-1835
>             Project: Phoenix
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>            Reporter: James Taylor
>            Assignee: Thomas D'Silva
>
> Phoenix correlates table metadata with the table data based on timestamp. 
> Since Tephra is adjusting timestamps for the data, we need to do the same for 
> the metadata operations (which aren't transactional through Tephra). Take a 
> look at MetaDataEndPointImpl and the MetaDataMutationResult where we return 
> the server timestamp (i.e. MetaDataMutationResult.getTable() for example). 
> This timestamp should be run through the TransactionUtil.translateTimestamp() 
> method).
> Add a point-in-time test with a table being altered, but your connection 
> being before that time (with CURRENT_SCN) as a test. We'll need to make sure 
> the Puts to the SYSTEM.CATALOG get timestamped correctly (but I think the 
> above will cause that).
> Also, my other hack in PostDDLCompiler, should not be necessary after this:
> {code}
>                         // FIXME: DDL operations aren't transactional, so 
> we're basing the timestamp on a server timestamp.
>                         // Not sure what the fix should be. We don't need 
> conflict detection nor filtering of invalid transactions
>                         // in this case, so maybe this is ok.
>                         if (tableRef.getTable().isTransactional()) {
>                             ts = TransactionUtil.translateMillis(ts);
>                         }
> {code}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to