[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-4278?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16304273#comment-16304273 ]
James Taylor commented on PHOENIX-4278: --------------------------------------- [~ohads] - MutationState calls IndexUtil.generateIndexData() which eventually calls IndexMaintainer.buildUpdateMutation(). The IndexMaintainer code is used for both immutable and mutable indexes. > Implement pure client side transactional index maintenance > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: PHOENIX-4278 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-4278 > Project: Phoenix > Issue Type: Improvement > Reporter: James Taylor > Assignee: Ohad Shacham > > The index maintenance for transactions follows the same model as non > transactional tables - coprocessor based on data table updates that looks up > previous row value to perform maintenance. This is necessary for non > transactional tables to ensure the rows are locked so that a consistent view > may be obtained. However, for transactional tables, the time stamp oracle > ensures uniqueness of time stamps (via transaction IDs) and the filtering > handles a scan seeing the "true" last committed value for a row. Thus, > there's no hard dependency to perform this on the server side. > Moving the index maintenance to the client side would prevent any RS->RS RPC > calls (which have proved to be troublesome for HBase). It would require > returning more data to the client (i.e. the prior row value), but this seems > like a reasonable tradeoff. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.4.14#64029)