[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-3737?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13465160#comment-13465160
]
Lars Hofhansl commented on HBASE-3737:
--------------------------------------
This is still the case in trunk.
Also looking at the Delete(List<Delete>) code, the passed lists gets modified
and will contain those Deletes that failed to be executed. The client
presumably has to check and retry. I doubt anybody is doing that.
Put(List<Put>) is similar (but worse IMHO). The call to the Put method happily
returns even when there are left over Puts in the write buffer.
> HTable - delete(List<Delete>) doesn't use writebuffer
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-3737
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-3737
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Doug Meil
> Priority: Minor
>
> I just realized that htable.delete(List<Delete>) doesn't use the writebuffer
> and processes the list immediately, but htable.put(List<Put>) does use the
> writebuffer (i.e., send when filled). Likewise, htable.delete(Delete) sends
> immediately.
>
> Out of sheer curiosity, why? With the 'batch' methods now in place, it seems
> like it would be consistent for 'delete' and 'put' to use the writebuffer
> (assuming it is expanded to hold more than Puts), whereas 'batch' methods
> process immediately.
> This isn't a huge issue, but it does seem a little inconsistent.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
