[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5241?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13209114#comment-13209114
]
Phabricator commented on HBASE-5241:
------------------------------------
aaiyer has commented on the revision "HBASE-5241 [jira] Deletes should not mask
Puts that come after it.".
INLINE COMMENTS
src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/regionserver/TestCompaction.java:277
Technically, this should have never passed with the old settings
expectedResults = 2.
It was passing due to a bug; which deleted version 0, whenever there was a
delete for version 1. changing familyStamp to -1 should fix this.
But, I'm having trouble convincing myself expectedResults = 3 is undoubtedly
correct. It seems debatable. Any thoughts?
REVISION DETAIL
https://reviews.facebook.net/D1731
> 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
