[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-9117?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13920158#comment-13920158
]
Nick Dimiduk commented on HBASE-9117:
-------------------------------------
bq. From your plan, it seems that you are suggesting we get rid of "managed"
connections from HTable completely.
That's correct. I believe this is inline with this ticket's scope.
bq. I don't think we can do 4 and 5 in 0.98 that would be a big change.
It's internal only. Is it too large a change to consider for 0.98? The risk of
destabilization too high?
bq. I am less in favor of 6 and 7, because it would imply that we break most of
the clients, and the transition period is not enough.
That's true, but then we're left with an API that isn't exercised internally
and thus confidence in test coverage decreases.
I wonder if it's better to implement the new APIs and replace this effort with
a ticket to cut over to those APIs internally?
> Remove HTablePool and all HConnection pooling related APIs
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-9117
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-9117
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Lars Hofhansl
> Assignee: Nick Dimiduk
> Priority: Critical
> Fix For: 0.99.0
>
> Attachments: HBASE-9117.00.patch, HBASE-9117.01.patch,
> HBASE-9117.02.patch, HBASE-9117.03.patch, HBASE-9117.04.patch,
> HBASE-9117.05.patch, HBASE-9117.06.patch
>
>
> The recommended way is now:
> # Create an HConnection: HConnectionManager.createConnection(...)
> # Create a light HTable: HConnection.getTable(...)
> # table.close()
> # connection.close()
> All other API and pooling will be removed.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
