[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-6580?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13727368#comment-13727368
]
Lars Hofhansl commented on HBASE-6580:
--------------------------------------
Also, do this in 0.94? So we get the deprecation in?
I'm fine with punting on this in 0.94 as it is really just convenience. The
existing HTable constructors provide all this functionality (albeit in a more
clumsy way).
> Deprecate HTablePool in favor of HConnection.getTable(...)
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-6580
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-6580
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Affects Versions: 0.94.6, 0.95.0
> Reporter: Lars Hofhansl
> Assignee: Lars Hofhansl
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 0.98.0, 0.95.2, 0.94.11
>
> Attachments: 6580-trunk.txt, HBASE-6580_v1.patch, HBASE-6580_v2.patch
>
>
> Update:
> I now propose deprecating HTablePool and instead introduce a getTable method
> on HConnection and allow HConnection to manage the ThreadPool.
> Initial proposal:
> Here I propose a very simple TablePool.
> It could be called LightHTablePool (or something - if you have a better name).
> Internally it would maintain an HConnection and an Executor service and each
> invocation of getTable(...) would create a new HTable and close() would just
> close it.
> In testing I find this more light weight than HTablePool and easier to
> monitor in terms of resources used.
> It would hardly be more than a few dozen lines of 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
