[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-19863?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16344426#comment-16344426
]
Hadoop QA commented on HBASE-19863:
-----------------------------------
| (x) *{color:red}-1 overall{color}* |
\\
\\
|| Vote || Subsystem || Runtime || Comment ||
| {color:blue}0{color} | {color:blue} reexec {color} | {color:blue} 0m
11s{color} | {color:blue} Docker mode activated. {color} |
|| || || || {color:brown} Prechecks {color} ||
| {color:blue}0{color} | {color:blue} findbugs {color} | {color:blue} 0m
0s{color} | {color:blue} Findbugs executables are not available. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} hbaseanti {color} | {color:green} 0m
0s{color} | {color:green} Patch does not have any anti-patterns. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} @author {color} | {color:green} 0m
0s{color} | {color:green} The patch does not contain any @author tags. {color} |
| {color:red}-1{color} | {color:red} test4tests {color} | {color:red} 0m
0s{color} | {color:red} The patch doesn't appear to include any new or modified
tests. Please justify why no new tests are needed for this patch. Also please
list what manual steps were performed to verify this patch. {color} |
|| || || || {color:brown} master Compile Tests {color} ||
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} mvninstall {color} | {color:green} 4m
59s{color} | {color:green} master passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} compile {color} | {color:green} 0m
48s{color} | {color:green} master passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} checkstyle {color} | {color:green} 1m
13s{color} | {color:green} master passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} shadedjars {color} | {color:green} 6m
6s{color} | {color:green} branch has no errors when building our shaded
downstream artifacts. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} javadoc {color} | {color:green} 0m
28s{color} | {color:green} master passed {color} |
|| || || || {color:brown} Patch Compile Tests {color} ||
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} mvninstall {color} | {color:green} 4m
21s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} compile {color} | {color:green} 0m
43s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} javac {color} | {color:green} 0m
43s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} checkstyle {color} | {color:green} 1m
5s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} whitespace {color} | {color:green} 0m
0s{color} | {color:green} The patch has no whitespace issues. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} shadedjars {color} | {color:green} 4m
46s{color} | {color:green} patch has no errors when building our shaded
downstream artifacts. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} hadoopcheck {color} | {color:green}
18m 25s{color} | {color:green} Patch does not cause any errors with Hadoop
2.6.5 2.7.4 or 3.0.0. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} javadoc {color} | {color:green} 0m
28s{color} | {color:green} the patch passed {color} |
|| || || || {color:brown} Other Tests {color} ||
| {color:red}-1{color} | {color:red} unit {color} | {color:red}105m 41s{color}
| {color:red} hbase-server in the patch failed. {color} |
| {color:green}+1{color} | {color:green} asflicense {color} | {color:green} 0m
19s{color} | {color:green} The patch does not generate ASF License warnings.
{color} |
| {color:black}{color} | {color:black} {color} | {color:black}143m 49s{color} |
{color:black} {color} |
\\
\\
|| Reason || Tests ||
| Failed junit tests | hadoop.hbase.TestZooKeeper |
\\
\\
|| Subsystem || Report/Notes ||
| Docker | Client=17.05.0-ce Server=17.05.0-ce Image:yetus/hbase:eee3b01 |
| JIRA Issue | HBASE-19863 |
| JIRA Patch URL |
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12908234/HBASE-19863-branch1.patch
|
| Optional Tests | asflicense javac javadoc unit findbugs shadedjars
hadoopcheck hbaseanti checkstyle compile |
| uname | Linux a53b47ac1993 3.13.0-133-generic #182-Ubuntu SMP Tue Sep 19
15:49:21 UTC 2017 x86_64 GNU/Linux |
| Build tool | maven |
| Personality |
/home/jenkins/jenkins-slave/workspace/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/component/dev-support/hbase-personality.sh
|
| git revision | master / 34c6c99041 |
| maven | version: Apache Maven 3.5.2
(138edd61fd100ec658bfa2d307c43b76940a5d7d; 2017-10-18T07:58:13Z) |
| Default Java | 1.8.0_151 |
| unit |
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/11240/artifact/patchprocess/patch-unit-hbase-server.txt
|
| Test Results |
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/11240/testReport/ |
| modules | C: hbase-server U: hbase-server |
| Console output |
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HBASE-Build/11240/console |
| Powered by | Apache Yetus 0.6.0 http://yetus.apache.org |
This message was automatically generated.
> java.lang.IllegalStateException: isDelete failed when SingleColumnValueFilter
> is used
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-19863
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-19863
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Filters
> Affects Versions: 1.4.1
> Reporter: Sergey Soldatov
> Assignee: Sergey Soldatov
> Priority: Major
> Attachments: HBASE-19863-branch1.patch, HBASE-19863-test.patch
>
>
> Under some circumstances scan with SingleColumnValueFilter may fail with an
> exception
> {noformat}
> java.lang.IllegalStateException: isDelete failed: deleteBuffer=C3,
> qualifier=C2, timestamp=1516433595543, comparison result: 1
> at
> org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.ScanDeleteTracker.isDeleted(ScanDeleteTracker.java:149)
> at
> org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.ScanQueryMatcher.match(ScanQueryMatcher.java:386)
> at
> org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.StoreScanner.next(StoreScanner.java:545)
> at
> org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.KeyValueHeap.next(KeyValueHeap.java:147)
> at
> org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.HRegion$RegionScannerImpl.populateResult(HRegion.java:5876)
> at
> org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.HRegion$RegionScannerImpl.nextInternal(HRegion.java:6027)
> at
> org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.HRegion$RegionScannerImpl.nextRaw(HRegion.java:5814)
> at
> org.apache.hadoop.hbase.regionserver.RSRpcServices.scan(RSRpcServices.java:2552)
> at
> org.apache.hadoop.hbase.protobuf.generated.ClientProtos$ClientService$2.callBlockingMethod(ClientProtos.java:32385)
> at org.apache.hadoop.hbase.ipc.RpcServer.call(RpcServer.java:2150)
> at org.apache.hadoop.hbase.ipc.CallRunner.run(CallRunner.java:112)
> at
> org.apache.hadoop.hbase.ipc.RpcExecutor$Handler.run(RpcExecutor.java:187)
> at
> org.apache.hadoop.hbase.ipc.RpcExecutor$Handler.run(RpcExecutor.java:167)
> {noformat}
> Conditions:
> table T with a single column family 0 that uses ROWCOL bloom filter
> (important) and column qualifiers C1,C2,C3,C4,C5.
> When we fill the table for every row we put deleted cell for C3.
> The table has a single region with two HStore:
> A: start row: 0, stop row: 99
> B: start row: 10 stop row: 99
> B has newer versions of rows 10-99. Store files have several blocks each
> (important).
> Store A is the result of major compaction, so it doesn't have any deleted
> cells (important).
> So, we are running a scan like:
> {noformat}
> scan 'T', { COLUMNS => ['0:C3','0:C5'], FILTER => "SingleColumnValueFilter
> ('0','C5',=,'binary:whatever')"}
> {noformat}
> How the scan performs:
> First, we iterate A for rows 0 and 1 without any problems.
> Next, we start to iterate A for row 10, so read the first cell and set hfs
> scanner to A :
> 10:0/C1/0/Put/x but found that we have a newer version of the cell in B :
> 10:0/C1/1/Put/x,
> so we make B as our current store scanner. Since we are looking for
> particular columns
> C3 and C5, we perform the optimization StoreScanner.seekOrSkipToNextColumn
> which
> would run reseek for all store scanners.
> For store A the following magic would happen in requestSeek:
> 1. bloom filter check passesGeneralBloomFilter would set haveToSeek to
> false because row 10 doesn't have C3 qualifier in store A.
> 2. Since we don't have to seek we just create a fake row
> 10:0/C3/OLDEST_TIMESTAMP/Maximum, an optimization that is quite important for
> us and it commented with :
> {noformat}
> // Multi-column Bloom filter optimization.
> // Create a fake key/value, so that this scanner only bubbles up to the
> top
> // of the KeyValueHeap in StoreScanner after we scanned this row/column in
> // all other store files. The query matcher will then just skip this fake
> // key/value and the store scanner will progress to the next column. This
> // is obviously not a "real real" seek, but unlike the fake KV earlier in
> // this method, we want this to be propagated to ScanQueryMatcher.
> {noformat}
>
> For store B we would set it to fake 10:0/C3/createFirstOnRowColTS()/Maximum
> to skip C3 entirely.
> After that we start searching for qualifier C5 using seekOrSkipToNextColumn
> which run first trySkipToNextColumn:
> {noformat}
> protected boolean trySkipToNextColumn(Cell cell) throws IOException {
> Cell nextCell = null;
> do {
> Cell nextIndexedKey = getNextIndexedKey();
> if (nextIndexedKey != null && nextIndexedKey !=
> KeyValueScanner.NO_NEXT_INDEXED_KEY
> && matcher.compareKeyForNextColumn(nextIndexedKey, cell) >= 0) {
> this.heap.next();
> ++kvsScanned;
> } else {
> return false;
> }
> } while ((nextCell = this.heap.peek()) != null &&
> CellUtil.matchingRowColumn(cell, nextCell));
> return true;
> }
> {noformat}
> If store has several blocks than nextIndexedKey would be not null and
> compareKeyForNextColumn wouldn't be negative,
> so we try to search forward until we index or end of the row. But in
> this.heap.next(), the scanner for A bubbles up (as the comment promise) and
> we try to get next value from it.
> And here is the problem:
> If StoreFileScanner has current set to fake 10:0/C3/OLDEST_TIMESTAMP/Maximum,
> the underlying hfs still has 10:0/C1/O/Put, so the next call for next()
> would set current value to 10:0/C2/0/x, which we pass to ScanQueryMatcher and
> it fails with the early mentioned exception because DeleteTracker pointed to
> the latest delete we saw and that would be (10:0:/C3/1/Delete)
> So the problem happens because:
> 1. in trySkipToNextColumn we don't expect any of 'bubble' ups and plan to
> iterate to the next column/next row/next block.
> 2. Optimization with fake rows is done to avoid unnecessary seeks.
> 3. KeyValueHeap.next() knows nothing about fake rows so at one moment it may
> use scanner that has inconsistent state (cur value is far behind of
> hfs.keyValue, so seek is required before next())
> We don't have any UT yet due to the complexity of the real use case, but it
> would be nice to discuss the way how to fix it. Personally, the easiest and
> safest way is to make KeyValueHeap be aware of bloom filter optimization and
> handle fake rows. So, in next() when we set new current scanner we may check
> whether it has cur set to a fake value and enforce seek if so. The check
> itself is supposed to be quick (timestamp & max comparison).
> Any thoughts/suggestions [~stack], [~anoop.hbase], [~aertoria]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
