[ 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