[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-13286?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Nicolas Liochon updated HBASE-13286:
------------------------------------
Description:
There is a check in the client to be sure that we don't use a timeout of zero
(i.e. infinite). This includes setting the minimal time out for a rpc timeout
to 2 seconds. However, it makes sense for some calls (typically gets going to
the cache) to have much lower timeouts. So it's better to do the check vs. zero
but with a minimal timeout of 1.
I fixed a typo & a wrong comment in this patch as well. I don't understand this
code:
{code}
// t could be a RemoteException so go around again.
translateException(t); // We don't use the result?
{code}
but may be it's good.
was:
There is a check in the client to be sure that we don't use a timeout of zero
(i.e. infinite). This includes setting the minimal time out for a rpc timeout
to 2 seconds. However, it makes sense for some calls (typically gets going to
the cache) to have much lower timeouts. So it's better to do the check vs. zero
but with a minimal timeout of 0.
I fixed a typo & a wrong comment in this patch as well. I don't understand this
code:
{code}
// t could be a RemoteException so go around again.
translateException(t); // We don't use the result?
{code}
but may be it's good.
> Minimum timeout for a rpc call could be 1 ms instead of 2 seconds
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-13286
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-13286
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Client
> Affects Versions: 1.0.0, 0.98.12
> Reporter: Nicolas Liochon
> Assignee: Nicolas Liochon
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 1.1.0
>
> Attachments: 13286.patch
>
>
> There is a check in the client to be sure that we don't use a timeout of zero
> (i.e. infinite). This includes setting the minimal time out for a rpc timeout
> to 2 seconds. However, it makes sense for some calls (typically gets going to
> the cache) to have much lower timeouts. So it's better to do the check vs.
> zero but with a minimal timeout of 1.
> I fixed a typo & a wrong comment in this patch as well. I don't understand
> this code:
> {code}
> // t could be a RemoteException so go around again.
> translateException(t); // We don't use the result?
> {code}
> but may be it's good.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
