[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-4015?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13085533#comment-13085533
]
ramkrishna.s.vasudevan commented on HBASE-4015:
-----------------------------------------------
@Stack
I am ready to work together :). Stack as in my previous comment I just got an
highlevel points to be done if we stick with OFFLINE state itself. But I have
not yet started my implementation.
So whats your idea Stack? Can i start digging as how many changes do we need to
make if we go with OFFLINE state and what are the interface changes etc. Or
you have anything else in mind ?
> Refactor the TimeoutMonitor to make it less racy
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-4015
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-4015
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Affects Versions: 0.90.3
> Reporter: Jean-Daniel Cryans
> Assignee: ramkrishna.s.vasudevan
> Priority: Blocker
> Fix For: 0.92.0
>
> Attachments: HBASE-4015_1_trunk.patch, Timeoutmonitor with state
> diagrams.pdf
>
>
> The current implementation of the TimeoutMonitor acts like a race condition
> generator, mostly making things worse rather than better. It does it's own
> thing for a while without caring for what's happening in the rest of the
> master.
> The first thing that needs to happen is that the regions should not be
> processed in one big batch, because that sometimes can take minutes to
> process (meanwhile a region that timed out opening might have opened, then
> what happens is it will be reassigned by the TimeoutMonitor generating the
> never ending PENDING_OPEN situation).
> Those operations should also be done more atomically, although I'm not sure
> how to do it in a scalable way in this case.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
