[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20847?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16537045#comment-16537045
]
stack edited comment on HBASE-20847 at 7/9/18 3:15 PM:
-------------------------------------------------------
bq. The locks which have already been held by parent procedures should also be
considered as held by sub procedures. This is OK as we can make sure that the
parent procedure will not release the lock before the sub procedures, as it can
only be executed again after all the sub procedures have finished.
Are we talking about the post-master crash scenario? Is the suggestion that
sub-procedures just assume and put back in place the locks that were taken out
by parent procedures when they run post-crash? And this will be ok as long as
the parent waits on all sub-procedures to complete before it lets-go of shared
or exclusive lock? (Which is how it currently works?).
If a sub-procedure is scheduled post-crash, why not wait and let the parent
procedure run again so it can create any locks? Is it because parent procedures
are not written to do this? Because parents cede control to sub-procedures and
depend on their completion before they can be scheduled again?
(I can help by writing this up... Thanks)
was (Author: stack):
bq. The locks which have already been held by parent procedures should also be
considered as held by sub procedures. This is OK as we can make sure that the
parent procedure will not release the lock before the sub procedures, as it can
only be executed again after all the sub procedures have finished.
Are we talking about the post-master crash scenario? Is the suggestion that
sub-procedures assume locks that were taken out by parent procedures?
> The parent procedure of RegionTransitionProcedure may not have the table lock
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-20847
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-20847
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: proc-v2, Region Assignment
> Reporter: Duo Zhang
> Assignee: Duo Zhang
> Priority: Major
> Attachments: HBASE-20847-v1.patch, HBASE-20847.patch
>
>
> For example, SCP can also schedule AssignProcedure and obviously it will not
> hold the table lock.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
