[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-7801?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13627502#comment-13627502
]
Lars Hofhansl commented on HBASE-7801:
--------------------------------------
Thanks Anoop.
#1 yes
#2 Oops, you're right. It's per table. Will fix.
#3 That works, because later in doMiniBatchMutation we only call syncOrDefer if
the WALEdit is not empty. But you are right, this can be made
safer/easier-to-read if we track the durability even in that case.
I'm thinking about how I could test this. Would need to something like holding
the async flush, and doing that on request in a test. That way one write a
bunch, check that it's not in the log, then run the async flush, check again.
Maybe for later.
> Allow a deferred sync option per Mutation.
> ------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-7801
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-7801
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Affects Versions: 0.94.6, 0.95.0
> Reporter: Lars Hofhansl
> Assignee: Lars Hofhansl
> Fix For: 0.98.0, 0.94.7, 0.95.1
>
> Attachments: 7801-0.94-v1.txt, 7801-0.94-v2.txt, 7801-0.94-v3.txt,
> 7801-0.96-full-v2.txt, 7801-0.96-full-v3.txt, 7801-0.96-full-v4.txt,
> 7801-0.96-full-v5.txt, 7801-0.96-v1.txt, 7801-0.96-v6.txt, 7801-0.96-v7.txt,
> 7801-0.96-v8.txt, 7801-0.96-v9.txt
>
>
> Won't have time for parent. But a deferred sync option on a per operation
> basis comes up quite frequently.
> In 0.96 this can be handled cleanly via protobufs and 0.94 we can have a
> special mutation attribute.
> For batch operation we'd take the safest sync option of any of the mutations.
> I.e. if there is at least one that wants to be flushed we'd sync the batch,
> if there's none of those but at least one that wants deferred flush we defer
> flush the batch, etc.
--
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
