[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SQOOP-3267?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16280029#comment-16280029
 ] 

Daniel Voros commented on SQOOP-3267:
-------------------------------------

[~maugli] thanks for your response. Is the intention behind append mode to keep 
the history? I thought it's the mode to use when importing an append-only table 
where you're only creating new records but never change the existing ones. Thus 
I thought changes (and so deletes) never happen when you're using append mode 
with the correct last-value. Am I missing something here?

I think it's usually a bad idea to delete only the last version of a column, 
since then a simple "get" in hbase might return an inconsistent state (one that 
never existed on the source side). If we are to keep history we should probably 
put null (or empty string) values instead of deleting.

Please let me know what you think!

> Incremental import to HBase deletes only last version of column
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SQOOP-3267
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SQOOP-3267
>             Project: Sqoop
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: hbase-integration
>    Affects Versions: 1.4.7
>            Reporter: Daniel Voros
>            Assignee: Daniel Voros
>         Attachments: SQOOP-3267.1.patch
>
>
> Deletes are supported since SQOOP-3149, but we're only deleting the last 
> version of a column when the corresponding cell was set to NULL in the source 
> table.
> This can lead to unexpected and misleading results if the row has been 
> transferred multiple times, which can easily happen if it's being modified on 
> the source side.
> Also SQOOP-3149 is using a new Put command for every column instead of a 
> single Put per row as before. This could probably lead to a performance drop 
> for wide tables (for which HBase is otherwise usually recommended).
> [~jilani], [~anna.szonyi] could you please comment on what you think would be 
> the expected behavior here?



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

Reply via email to