[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5058?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13173364#comment-13173364
]
Lars Hofhansl commented on HBASE-5058:
--------------------------------------
@Stack: I think that about sums it up. The complexity of layers and timeout
stories are alleviated somewhat by parent HBASE-4805 (no per HTable threadpool,
HTablePool no longer needed).
I had a brief look at the first issue, unless I am missing something this would
require a nontrivial amount of refactoring. The simplest would be to do all
network IO from the Connection thread rather than the application thread (as
described in HBASE-4956). Would need allow for the client to synchronize and
retrieved exceptions on/from a Future.
Short term, should we take HBASE-4805 all the way and a getTable(...) method to
HConnection? (Or even further and add put/get/scan/etc methods that take a
table name to HConnection?)
Long term a design based on asynchhbase with a thin synchronous layer on top is
probably the best option.
> Allow HBaseAmin to use an existing connection
> ---------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-5058
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5058
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: client
> Affects Versions: 0.94.0
> Reporter: Lars Hofhansl
> Assignee: Lars Hofhansl
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 0.94.0
>
> Attachments: 5058-v2.txt, 5058-v3.txt, 5058-v3.txt, 5058.txt
>
>
> What HBASE-4805 does for HTables, this should do for HBaseAdmin.
> Along with this the shared error handling and retrying between HBaseAdmin and
> HConnectionManager can also be improved. I'll attach a first pass patch soon.
--
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
