[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-12835?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
 ]

Enis Soztutar updated HBASE-12835:
----------------------------------
      Resolution: Fixed
    Hadoop Flags: Reviewed
          Status: Resolved  (was: Patch Available)

I've pushed this to branch-1 and branch-1.0, but not master. Master has new 
HTable create a separate Connection still in the hope that it will help reduce 
internal usage of old way of HTable construction. We can also remove this API 
in master at a later time. 

Thanks for reviews. 

> HBASE-12422 changed new HTable(Configuration) to not use managed Connections 
> anymore
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-12835
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-12835
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Enis Soztutar
>            Assignee: Enis Soztutar
>             Fix For: 1.0.0, 1.1.0
>
>         Attachments: hbase-12835_v1.patch, hbase-12835_v2.patch, 
> hbase-12835_v2.patch
>
>
> While debugging something else, I've noticed that HBASE-12422 changed it so 
> that new HTable(Configuration, TableName) is not using managed connections 
> anymore. 
> I thought the plan was to keep new HTable(Conf, TableName) to still use 
> managed connections, but allow the new APIs to have un-managed connections. 
> With HBASE-12422, there is a big compatibility change for used of the HTable 
> interface that suddenly they will be launching connections per HTable 
> instance which is a behavioral change and expensive (with all the meta cache, 
> zk threads, thread pool, etc). I fear that this will catch unsuspecting users 
> by surprise, that is why I think we should revert back to the deprecated 
> behavior for 1.0. For master we do not need to make the change, but document 
> it. 
> [~sduskis], [[email protected]], [~ndimiduk] what do you guys think?



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to