[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-5138?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16767424#comment-16767424
]
Geoffrey Jacoby edited comment on PHOENIX-5138 at 2/13/19 6:12 PM:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
[~tdsilva] - Do you think it would be sufficient to start the sequence at some
fixed point above MIN_VALUE (10, 100, 1000, whatever we think is a sane max
number of legacy indexes for a particular tenant and physical table), or would
we actually need to query SYSTEM.SEQUENCE for legacy sequences every time we
create a new view index sequence and take the max of their current values + 1
for the new sequence's start value?
was (Author: gjacoby):
[~tdsilva] - Do you think it would be sufficient to start the sequence at some
fixed point above MIN_VALUE (10, 100, 1000, whatever we think is a sane max
number of legacy indexes for a particular tenant and physical table), or would
we actually need to query SYSTEM.SEQUENCE for legacy sequences every time we
create a new view index sequence and take the max of their current values + 1?
> ViewIndexId sequences created after PHOENIX-5132 shouldn't collide with ones
> created before it
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: PHOENIX-5138
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-5138
> Project: Phoenix
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 4.15.0
> Reporter: Geoffrey Jacoby
> Assignee: Geoffrey Jacoby
> Priority: Major
>
> PHOENIX-5132 changed the ViewIndexId generation logic to use one sequence per
> physical view index table, whereas before it had been tenant + physical
> table. This removed the possibility of a tenant view index and a global view
> index having colliding ViewIndexIds.
> However, existing Phoenix environments may have already created tenant-owned
> view index ids using the old sequence, and under PHOENIX-5132 if they create
> another, its ViewIndexId will got back to MIN_VALUE, which could cause a
> collision with an existing view index id.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
