[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-23236?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17090196#comment-17090196
 ] 

Hive QA commented on HIVE-23236:
--------------------------------



Here are the results of testing the latest attachment:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/13000838/HIVE-23236.3.patch

{color:red}ERROR:{color} -1 due to no test(s) being added or modified.

{color:green}SUCCESS:{color} +1 due to 17124 tests passed

Test results: 
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HIVE-Build/21862/testReport
Console output: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-HIVE-Build/21862/console
Test logs: http://104.198.109.242/logs/PreCommit-HIVE-Build-21862/

Messages:
{noformat}
Executing org.apache.hive.ptest.execution.TestCheckPhase
Executing org.apache.hive.ptest.execution.PrepPhase
Executing org.apache.hive.ptest.execution.YetusPhase
Executing org.apache.hive.ptest.execution.ExecutionPhase
Executing org.apache.hive.ptest.execution.ReportingPhase
{noformat}

This message is automatically generated.

ATTACHMENT ID: 13000838 - PreCommit-HIVE-Build

> Remove the global lock from acquireLock
> ---------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HIVE-23236
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-23236
>             Project: Hive
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Marton Bod
>            Assignee: Marton Bod
>            Priority: Major
>         Attachments: HIVE-23236.1.patch, HIVE-23236.2.patch, 
> HIVE-23236.2.patch, HIVE-23236.3.patch
>
>
> Currently we have a global lock (NEXT_LOCK_ID) when running enqueueLock, 
> because the algorithm in checkLock requires the locks to have a well defined 
> order, and also requires that every lock component is already stored in the 
> RDBMS before checking the locks.
> Proposed approach:
>  * Enqueue locks without a global S4U lock, using an auto-incremented value 
> instead to get the next lock ID (modify next_lock_id table)
>  * Before checking for lock conflicts, issue a S4U for all lock components we 
> are requesting (db/table/partition level) in order to prevent other clients 
> for doing interleaving conflict check (especially late-coming clients holding 
> a lower lockID)
>  * Conflict check algorithm to check not just for lower lockIDs, but also 
> higher lockIDs which are already in 'acquired' state



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)

Reply via email to