[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8701?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13684769#comment-13684769
 ] 

Ted Yu commented on HBASE-8701:
-------------------------------

I will post a patch Monday morning which does the following:

HLogSplitter#LogReplayOutputSink#groupEditsByServer() would pass sequence Id as 
an attribue of the Put/Delete.
The region server which does log replay would check for this attribute in the 
mutations. If present, the sequence Id would be negated and stored in 
memstoreTS field of the KeyValue.
KeyValueHeap#KVScannerComparator#compare(KeyValueScanner left, KeyValueScanner 
right) would check for the presence of sequence Id in the KeyValue's retrieved 
by left.peek() and right.peek(). If sequence Id is present, its negated value 
would be used to sort KeyValue's accordingly.

The above approach avoids creating intermediate files while at the same time 
incurs minimal change to HFile format.
                
> distributedLogReplay need to apply wal edits in the receiving order of those 
> edits
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-8701
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8701
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: MTTR
>            Reporter: Jeffrey Zhong
>            Assignee: Jeffrey Zhong
>             Fix For: 0.98.0, 0.95.2
>
>
> This issue happens in distributedLogReplay mode when recovering multiple puts 
> of the same key + version(timestamp). After replay, the value is 
> nondeterministic of the key
> h5. The original concern situation raised from [~eclark]:
> For all edits the rowkey is the same.
> There's a log with: [ A (ts = 0), B (ts = 0) ]
> Replay the first half of the log.
> A user puts in C (ts = 0)
> Memstore has to flush
> A new Hfile will be created with [ C, A ] and MaxSequenceId = C's seqid.
> Replay the rest of the Log.
> Flush
> The issue will happen in similar situation like Put(key, t=T) in WAL1 and 
> Put(key,t=T) in WAL2
> h5. Below is the option I'd like to use:
> a) During replay, we pass wal file name hash in each replay batch and 
> original wal sequence id of each edit to the receiving RS
> b) Once a wal is recovered, playing RS send a signal to the receiving RS so 
> the receiving RS can flush
> c) In receiving RS, different WAL file of a region sends edits to different 
> memstores.(We can visualize this in high level as sending changes to a new 
> region object with name(origin region name + wal name hash) and use the 
> original sequence Ids.) 
> d) writes from normal traffic(allow writes during recovery) are put in normal 
> memstores as of today and flush normally with new sequenceIds.
> h5. The other alternative options are listed below for references:
> Option one
> a) disallow writes during recovery
> b) during replay, we pass original wal sequence ids
> c) hold flush till all wals of a recovering region are replayed. Memstore 
> should hold because we only recover unflushed wal edits. For edits with same 
> key + version, whichever with larger sequence Id wins.
> Option two
> a) During replay, we pass original wal sequence ids
> b) for each wal edit, we store each edit's original sequence id along with 
> its key. 
> c) during scanning, we use the original sequence id if it's present otherwise 
> its store file sequence Id
> d) compaction can just leave put with max sequence id
> Please let me know if you have better ideas.

--
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

Reply via email to