[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5241?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13208765#comment-13208765
]
Lars Hofhansl commented on HBASE-5241:
--------------------------------------
I fear we'd have two chronological dimensions now. One as indicated by the
timestamps and another indicated by the order in which the changes are
physically applied (memstoreTS).
This "problem" is really only a problem when Deletes are dated into the future
or Puts are dated in the past. Any app doing this must be aware of the
implications.
It just seems like a non-issue to me :)
Replication is just happens to be a place where I can see problems. I'm sure
there're more (multi actions, etc).
Is the memstoreTS written to the WAL? (Replication uses WAL shipping).
> Deletes should not mask Puts that come after it.
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-5241
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5241
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Amitanand Aiyer
> Attachments: HBASE-5241.D1731.1.patch
>
>
> Suppose that we have a delete row, and then followed by the put. The delete
> row
> can mask the put, unless there was a major compaction in between.
> Now that we are flushing the memstoreTS to disk, along with the KVs, we
> should be able
> to differentiate whether or not the Put happened after the Delete and offer
> better
> delete semantics.
> Couldn't find a pre-existing JIRA that already discusses this, so creating
> one.
> Seems related to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-2406, but is not
> quite the same.
--
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
