chrajeshbabu commented on PR #5661: URL: https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/5661#issuecomment-1961737937
> @Apache9 Thanks for response. Even I am thinking the same while moving namespaces to the new RS group would be better to have following options. > > 1. **Move All Tables:** This option involves moving all tables within a namespace to the new RS group, regardless of the current RS group they belong to. This would effectively consolidate all tables of the namespace into the new RS group. This is the same as the current implementation so it can be default behavior. > > 2. **Move Tables present in current RS group**: With this option, only tables belonging to the current RS group of the namespace would be moved to the new RS group. This provides more granular control, allowing users to choose specific tables to move based on their needs. If the namespace does not belong to any RS group, the namespace tables in the default RS group would be moved to the new RS group. > > 3. **Move No Tables:** This option involves changing the RS group of the namespace without moving any tables. Existing tables would remain in their current RS group. This could be useful if there's a desire to separate the namespaces by RS group but without immediately moving the tables. > > > With this options we can give control to user choose proper option based on the requirements. Will start working on it. Happy to add if any new options possible. > > We wanted to use RS Groups for managing multiple tenants data in same cluster currently a namespace belongs to a tenant so first option is best fit for us. @Apache9 wdyt? Will create separate JIRA for this and work on it if it's fine. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
