[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-6580?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13732192#comment-13732192
]
Ted Yu commented on HBASE-6580:
-------------------------------
+1
nit, in several places:
{code}
+ * be create for each using thread.
{code}
'create' -> 'created'
> 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
> Fix For: 0.98.0, 0.95.2, 0.94.12
>
> Attachments: 6580-0.94.txt, 6580-trunk.txt, 6580-trunk-v2.txt,
> 6580-trunk-v3.txt, 6580-trunk-v4.txt, 6580-trunk-v5.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
