[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8763?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15135685#comment-15135685
]
Hudson commented on HBASE-8763:
-------------------------------
FAILURE: Integrated in HBase-1.1-JDK7 #1654 (See
[https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase-1.1-JDK7/1654/])
HBASE-15213 Fix increment performance regression caused by HBASE-8763 on
(stack: rev 7ac940b4b06c3ac14cb6d2702e2a5db415d8a6f8)
*
hbase-server/src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/regionserver/MultiVersionConsistencyControl.java
> Combine MVCC and SeqId
> ----------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-8763
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8763
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: regionserver
> Reporter: Enis Soztutar
> Assignee: Jeffrey Zhong
> Priority: Critical
> Fix For: 0.99.0
>
> Attachments: HBase MVCC & LogSeqId Combined.pdf,
> hbase-8736-poc.patch, hbase-8763-poc-v1.patch, hbase-8763-v1.patch,
> hbase-8763-v2.patch, hbase-8763-v3.patch, hbase-8763-v4.patch,
> hbase-8763-v5.1.patch, hbase-8763-v5.2.patch, hbase-8763-v5.patch,
> hbase-8763_wip1.patch
>
>
> HBASE-8701 and a lot of recent issues include good discussions about mvcc +
> seqId semantics. It seems that having mvcc and the seqId complicates the
> comparator semantics a lot in regards to flush + WAL replay + compactions +
> delete markers and out of order puts.
> Thinking more about it I don't think we need a MVCC write number which is
> different than the seqId. We can keep the MVCC semantics, read point and
> smallest read points intact, but combine mvcc write number and seqId. This
> will allow cleaner semantics + implementation + smaller data files.
> We can do some brainstorming for 0.98. We still have to verify that this
> would be semantically correct, it should be so by my current understanding.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
