[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-9095?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13727855#comment-13727855
]
Hadoop QA commented on HBASE-9095:
----------------------------------
{color:red}-1 overall{color}. Here are the results of testing the latest
attachment
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12595621/9095-1.txt
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:red}-1 core tests{color}. The patch failed these unit tests:
{color:red}-1 core zombie tests{color}. There are 1 zombie test(s):
Test results:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/6573//testReport/
Findbugs warnings:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/6573//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-protocol.html
Findbugs warnings:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/6573//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-client.html
Findbugs warnings:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/6573//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-examples.html
Findbugs warnings:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/6573//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-hadoop1-compat.html
Findbugs warnings:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/6573//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-prefix-tree.html
Findbugs warnings:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/6573//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-common.html
Findbugs warnings:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/6573//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-server.html
Findbugs warnings:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/6573//artifact/trunk/patchprocess/newPatchFindbugsWarningshbase-hadoop-compat.html
Console output:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/6573//console
This message is automatically generated.
> AssignmentManager's handleRegion should respect the single threaded nature of
> the processing
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-9095
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-9095
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Region Assignment
> Reporter: Devaraj Das
> Assignee: Devaraj Das
> Fix For: 0.95.2
>
> Attachments: 9095-1.txt, 9095-1.txt
>
>
> While debugging a case where a region was getting opened on a RegionServer
> and then closed soon after (and then never re-opened anywhere thereafter), it
> seemed like the processing in handleRegion to do with deletion of ZK nodes
> should be non-asynchronous. This achieves two things:
> 1. The synchronous deletion prevents more than one processing on the same
> event data twice. Assuming that we do get more than one notification (on
> let's say, region OPENED event), the subsequent processing(s) in handleRegion
> for the same znode would end up with a zookeeper node not found exception.
> The return value of the data read would be null and that's already handled.
> If it is asynchronous, it leads to issues like - master opens a region on a
> certain RegionServer and soon after it sends that RegionServer a close for
> the same region, and then the znode is deleted.
> 2. The deletion is currently handled in an executor service. This is
> problematic since by design the events for a given region should be processed
> in order. By delegating a part of the processing to executor service we are
> somewhat violating this contract since there is no guarantee of the ordering
> in the executor service executions...
> Thanks to [~jeffreyz] and [~enis] for the discussions on this issue.
--
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
