[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10544?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13902126#comment-13902126
]
Andrew Purtell edited comment on HBASE-10544 at 2/14/14 11:34 PM:
------------------------------------------------------------------
bq. I think we need to redo flush and compaction requests as Procedures.
I don't relish the thought of the work involved but there are operational and
security risks involved with incomplete major compaction after schema changes,
such as changing compression settings, enabling encryption, etc. Assigning
myself.
Thoughts?
was (Author: apurtell):
bq. I think we need to redo flush and compaction requests as Procedures.
I don't relish the thought of the work involved but there are operational and
security risks involved with incomplete major compaction after schema changes,
such as changing compaction, enabling encryption, etc.
Thoughts?
> Surface completion state of global administrative actions
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-10544
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10544
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Andrew Purtell
> Assignee: Andrew Purtell
> Fix For: 0.98.1, 0.99.0
>
>
> When issuing requests for global administrative actions, such as major
> compaction, users have to look for indirect evidence the action has
> completed, and cannot really be sure of the final state.
> Hat tip to J-D and Stack.
> We can approach this a couple of ways. We could add a per regionserver metric
> for percentage of admin requests complete, maybe also aggregated by the
> master. This would provide a single point of reference. However if we also
> want to insure 100% completion even in the presence of node failures, or
> provide separate completion feedback for each request, I think we need to
> redo flush and compaction requests as Procedures.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1.5#6160)
