[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-7848?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13609578#comment-13609578
]
Jonathan Hsieh commented on HBASE-7848:
---------------------------------------
bq. On timeout, we delete the lock znode already, ZKInterProcessLockBase, line
199. In case of interruptions, I think we should ensure that the lock znode is
deleted before throwing the exception. This seems to be the model taken by
ReentrantLock in java. I'll open a jira for that.
Actually, can these more detailed semantics be added to the TableLock.acquire()
javadoc (follow on issue)? From what currently exists I don't know what to
expect in those error situations and would have needed to dig through a few
layers to get to it. Also I don't know the behavior from the release java doc
either if a lock wan't held.
http://hbase.apache.org/apidocs/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/master/TableLockManager.TableLock.html
bq. Though you are right that we have to ensure lock is properly cleaned up on
Interruption
Follow on issue? I think after an interrupts you'd have to check somehow or
force a release.
> Use ZK-based read/write lock to make flush-type snapshot robust against table
> enable/disable/alter
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-7848
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-7848
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: snapshots
> Affects Versions: 0.96.0
> Reporter: Ted Yu
> Assignee: Ted Yu
> Attachments: 7848-v1.txt, 7848-v2.txt, hbase-7848_v2.patch
>
>
> Current region split following flush would fail snapshot.
> We can utilize ZK-based read/write lock to make flush-type snapshot robust
--
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
