[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-13094?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15431374#comment-15431374
]
Lars Hofhansl commented on HBASE-13094:
---------------------------------------
Another complication with option #4 and two filters: All hooks other than
filterKeyValue would be ignored (or we'd need complicated logic to combine the
two filter everywhere for all hooks - with no added value over just a single
filter). Could document that only filterKeyValue is used, of course. The more I
think about this, the less I like it.
I think we simply need a way to decide whether the _one_ filter passed is
execute before or after the delete/column-selection logic in SQM. It will be
too confusing otherwise. That can be done with a new flag on Scan/Get or with
the hack I did in the patch here.
[~giacomotaylor], would the 2nd theme I describe (only allowing a single
Filter, which could be a FilterList) suffice for the Phoenix transaction use
case?
> Consider Filters that are evaluated before deletes and see delete markers
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-13094
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-13094
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Brainstorming
> Components: regionserver, Scanners
> Reporter: Lars Hofhansl
> Assignee: Lars Hofhansl
> Attachments: 13094-0.98.txt
>
>
> That would be good for full control filtering of all cells, such as needed
> for some transaction implementations.
> [~ghelmling]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
