[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17624?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15868368#comment-15868368
]
stack commented on HBASE-17624:
-------------------------------
Thanks [~toffer]
That makes sense. What you describe though seems like a general issue w/ our
assignment (and w/ having to rpc under a synchronization). If you can describe
how what was originally in place made it so moves would work though system
tables were in transition -- hbase:meta and hbase:rsgroup -- that'd help; how
was update of zk cache and updates to hbase:rsgroup protected perviously? I
didn't see coherent guard (probably my misunderstanding). Lets fix.
On Guava classes, yeah, we were likely inconsistent. Having Guava in our API
will mess us up especially if we want to upgrade the version or we want to
shade it.
Thanks for the help.
> Address late review of HBASE-6721, rsgroups feature
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-17624
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17624
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: rsgroup
> Reporter: stack
> Assignee: stack
> Fix For: 2.0.0
>
> Attachments: HBASE-17624.master.001.patch,
> HBASE-17624.master.002.patch, HBASE-17624.master.003.patch,
> HBASE-17624.master.004.patch, HBASE-17624.master.005.patch,
> HBASE-17624.master.006.patch, HBASE-17624.master.007.patch,
> HBASE-17624.master.008.patch, HBASE-17624.master.009.patch,
> HBASE-17624.master.010.patch
>
>
> An internal review by [~busbey] and [~appy] turned up a bunch of good
> findings going over HBASE-6721. They found some really good stuff a guava
> type is part of our public API and concurrency in a few core classes is
> inconsistent.
> Patch coming.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
