[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8458?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15271683#comment-15271683
]
Babar Tareen commented on HBASE-8458:
-------------------------------------
I implemented compare and set functionality for apache phoenix based on the
exclusive locking and coprocessors
(https://github.com/babartareen/phoenix/blob/master/phoenix-core/src/main/java/org/apache/phoenix/hbase/index/Indexer.java#L295).
With recent change to using ReadWriteLock, a coprocessor will no longer have
exclusive control over a row and thus won't be the correct place to intercept a
row update. CheckAndPut can not be called from the coprocessor as locks are
already acquired as @Esther noted. Where might be a better place to intercept
an update and be able to allow/skip it?
> Support for batch version of checkAndPut() and checkAndDelete()
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-8458
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8458
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Client, regionserver
> Affects Versions: 0.95.0
> Reporter: Hari Mankude
>
> The use case is that the user has multiple threads loading hundreds of keys
> into a hbase table. Occasionally there are collisions in the keys being
> uploaded by different threads. So for correctness, it is required to do
> checkAndPut() instead of a put(). However, doing a checkAndPut() rpc for
> every key update is non optimal. It would be good to have a batch version of
> checkAndPut() similar to batch put(). The client can partition the keys on
> region boundaries.
> The jira is NOT looking for any type of cross-row locking or multi-row
> atomicity with checkAndPut()
> Batch version of checkAndDelete() is a similar requirement.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
