[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5021?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13169816#comment-13169816
]
Phabricator commented on HBASE-5021:
------------------------------------
nspiegelberg has commented on the revision "[jira] [HBase-5021] Enforce upper
bound on timestamp".
@stack : looking around, will this be addressed better by HBASE-4605
Constraints in 0.94? Should I just put this in 89-fb and help the constraint
review so we have feature parity? I don't think you'd want to enable sanity
checking by default, since not all use cases use currentTimeMillis() are the
timestamp.
REVISION DETAIL
https://reviews.facebook.net/D849
> Enforce upper bound on timestamp
> --------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-5021
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5021
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Nicolas Spiegelberg
> Assignee: Nicolas Spiegelberg
> Priority: Critical
> Fix For: 0.94.0
>
> Attachments: D849.1.patch
>
>
> We have been getting hit with performance problems on our time-series
> database due to invalid timestamps being inserted by the timestamp. We are
> working on adding proper checks to app server, but production performance
> could be severely impacted with significant recovery time if something slips
> past. Since timestamps are considered a fundamental part of the HBase schema
> & multiple optimizations use timestamp information, we should allow the
> option to sanity check the upper bound on the server-side in HBase.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
