[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-2406?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12889952#action_12889952
 ] 

Jonathan Gray commented on HBASE-2406:
--------------------------------------

bq. What are you suggesting? That you do the Get with ts+1? Or you are 
suggesting that you get more than one version and then the app figures out what 
to do? Does that work? What if there is an entry at ts+1? App has to check for 
this?

In existing TimeRange, the max is exclusive, not inclusive.  What Bruno was 
asking about is getting the most recent version of something according to a max 
timestamp (but inclusive, not exclusive).  Since the timestamp is a long there 
aren't any precision issues... you just say max=TS+1 (exclusive) which 
effectively means, max=TS inclusive

bq. rather than let whatever the current state of implementation shape our 
behavior

Yeah, we should figure what we want.  I'm not saying we should decide based on 
how we do it currently, I'm saying it's still an open question what we should 
do on minor compactions (and was recently changed following removal of gets) 
and that a determination there could impact this stuff.  Or it could not.  Just 
saying the two are somewhat related.

But yeah, let's figure out what we want and not be overly concerned with 
current implementations.

> Define semantics of cell timestamps/versions
> --------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-2406
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-2406
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Task
>          Components: documentation
>            Reporter: Todd Lipcon
>            Priority: Critical
>             Fix For: 0.90.0
>
>
> There is a lot of general confusion over the semantics of the cell timestamp. 
> In particular, a couple questions that often come up:
> - If multiple writes to a cell have the same timestamp, are all versions 
> maintained or just the last?
> - Is it OK to write cells in a non-increasing timestamp order?
> Let's discuss, figure out what semantics make sense, and then move towards 
> (a) documentation, (b) unit tests that prove we have those semantics.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply via email to