[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IMPALA-9734?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17154791#comment-17154791
]
Sahil Takiar commented on IMPALA-9734:
--------------------------------------
I did some manual tests of ACID tables as well, and everything looks good. I
created an insert-only ACID table, ran a query on it, killed an impalad, and
then made sure the query was retried.
> ACID-query retry integration
> ----------------------------
>
> Key: IMPALA-9734
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IMPALA-9734
> Project: IMPALA
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Reporter: Sahil Takiar
> Assignee: Sahil Takiar
> Priority: Major
>
> We need to consider how query retries interact with ACID transactions. As of
> IMPALA-9199, Impala will create new ClientRequestStates for each query retry
> and will cache the TExecRequest between ClientRequestStates. This might not
> be safe for ACID transactions. If the first query attempt fails, then the
> transaction will fail and a new one will be required. However, the query
> retry will use the transaction id / info from the original query attempt.
> I think the semantics are not entirely clear here, and we don't have any
> tests for this. So the goal of this JIRA is to (1) identify if there are any
> issues with the current approach, (2) fix any issues with transactions during
> query retries, and (3) add some query retry tests that enable transactions.
> We might want to consider whether a query and it's retry should be in the
> same, or different transactions. Keeping them in the same transaction should
> allow us cache the TExecRequest. If they are in separate transactions, then
> Impala might need to create a new TExecRequest for each retry.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
