[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8874?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13708501#comment-13708501
]
Hadoop QA commented on HBASE-8874:
----------------------------------
{color:red}-1 overall{color}. Here are the results of testing the latest
attachment
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12592325/HBASE-8874_trunk.patch
against trunk revision .
{color:green}+1 @author{color}. The patch does not contain any @author
tags.
{color:red}-1 tests included{color}. The patch doesn't appear to include
any new or modified tests.
Please justify why no new tests are needed for this
patch.
Also please list what manual steps were performed to
verify this patch.
{color:green}+1 hadoop1.0{color}. The patch compiles against the hadoop
1.0 profile.
{color:green}+1 hadoop2.0{color}. The patch compiles against the hadoop
2.0 profile.
{color:green}+1 javadoc{color}. The javadoc tool did not generate any
warning messages.
{color:green}+1 javac{color}. The applied patch does not increase the
total number of javac compiler warnings.
{color:green}+1 findbugs{color}. The patch does not introduce any new
Findbugs (version 1.3.9) warnings.
{color:green}+1 release audit{color}. The applied patch does not increase
the total number of release audit warnings.
{color:green}+1 lineLengths{color}. The patch does not introduce lines
longer than 100
{color:green}+1 site{color}. The mvn site goal succeeds with this patch.
{color:green}+1 core tests{color}. The patch passed unit tests in .
Test results:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/6340//testReport/
Findbugs warnings:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/6340//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-prefix-tree.html
Findbugs warnings:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/6340//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-client.html
Findbugs warnings:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/6340//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-common.html
Findbugs warnings:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/6340//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-protocol.html
Findbugs warnings:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/6340//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-server.html
Findbugs warnings:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/6340//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-hadoop1-compat.html
Findbugs warnings:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/6340//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-examples.html
Findbugs warnings:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/6340//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-hadoop-compat.html
Console output:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/6340//console
This message is automatically generated.
> PutCombiner is skipping KeyValues while combining puts of same row during
> bulkload
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-8874
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8874
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: mapreduce
> Affects Versions: 0.95.0, 0.95.1
> Reporter: rajeshbabu
> Assignee: rajeshbabu
> Priority: Critical
> Fix For: 0.98.0, 0.95.2
>
> Attachments: HBASE-8874_trunk.patch
>
>
> While combining puts of same row in map phase we are using below logic in
> PutCombiner#reduce. In for loop first time we will add one Put object to puts
> map. Next time onwards we are just overriding key values of a family with key
> values of the same family in other put. So we are mostly writing one Put
> object to map output and remaining will be skipped(data loss).
> {code}
> Map<byte[], Put> puts = new TreeMap<byte[], Put>(Bytes.BYTES_COMPARATOR);
> for (Put p : vals) {
> cnt++;
> if (!puts.containsKey(p.getRow())) {
> puts.put(p.getRow(), p);
> } else {
> puts.get(p.getRow()).getFamilyMap().putAll(p.getFamilyMap());
> }
> }
> {code}
> We need to change logic similar as below because we are sure the rowkey of
> all the puts will be same.
> {code}
> Put finalPut = null;
> Map<byte[], List<? extends Cell>> familyMap = null;
> for (Put p : vals) {
> cnt++;
> if (finalPut==null) {
> finalPut = p;
> familyMap = finalPut.getFamilyMap();
> } else {
> for (Entry<byte[], List<? extends Cell>> entry :
> p.getFamilyMap().entrySet()) {
> List<? extends Cell> list = familyMap.get(entry.getKey());
> if (list == null) {
> familyMap.put(entry.getKey(), entry.getValue());
> } else {
> (((List<KeyValue>)list)).addAll((List<KeyValue>)entry.getValue());
> }
> }
> }
> }
> context.write(row, finalPut);
> {code}
> Also need to implement TODOs mentioned by Nick
> {code}
> // TODO: would be better if we knew <code>K row</code> and Put rowkey were
> // identical. Then this whole Put buffering business goes away.
> // TODO: Could use HeapSize to create an upper bound on the memory size of
> // the puts map and flush some portion of the content while looping. This
> // flush could result in multiple Puts for a single rowkey. That is
> // acceptable because Combiner is run as an optimization and it's not
> // critical that all Puts are grouped perfectly.
> {code}
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
