[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-18753?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16157228#comment-16157228
]
Anoop Sam John edited comment on HBASE-18753 at 9/7/17 4:54 PM:
----------------------------------------------------------------
CompositeImmutableSegment
We dont need a Sync TR here. This is Immutable segment.
Now we have Sync and Non sync versions of TR, we can not have a TR state in
Segment. We can have super type only here. Or may be this need change in the
Segment hierarchy also !! Am ok to do this as a follow up. Segment needs
Sync version of TR where as Immutable Segments can have Simple version
bq.TimeRangeTracker.Type.SIMPLE
Why name this way? NON_SYNC? That is not correct name?
bq.getTimeRangeTracker(final byte [] timeRangeTrackerBytes)
This can make a non sync version of TR right?
was (Author: anoop.hbase):
CompositeImmutableSegment
We dont need a Sync TR here. This is Immutable segment.
Now we have Sync and Non sync versions of TR, we can not have a TR state in
Segment. We can have super type only here. Or may be this need change in the
Segment hierarchy also !! Am ok to do this as a follow up
bq.TimeRangeTracker.Type.SIMPLE
Why name this way? NON_SYNC? That is not correct name?
bq.getTimeRangeTracker(final byte [] timeRangeTrackerBytes)
This can make a non sync version of TR right?
> Introduce the unsynchronized TimeRangeTracker
> ---------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-18753
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-18753
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Reporter: Chia-Ping Tsai
> Assignee: Chia-Ping Tsai
> Fix For: 2.0.0-alpha-3
>
> Attachments: HBASE-18753.v0.patch
>
>
> If HBASE-18752 is pushed, it will be better to introduce the unsync
> TimeRangeTracker for reducing the cost of recalculation.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
