[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-5478?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16957677#comment-16957677
 ] 

Hadoop QA commented on PHOENIX-5478:
------------------------------------

{color:red}-1 overall{color}.  Here are the results of testing the latest 
attachment 
  
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12983800/PHOENIX-5478.master.003.patch
  against master branch at commit 27ef3024cd3cd3bcf521cd932deb66166969f321.
  ATTACHMENT ID: 12983800

    {color:green}+1 @author{color}.  The patch does not contain any @author 
tags.

    {color:red}-1 tests included{color}.  The patch doesn't appear to include 
any new or modified tests.
                        Please justify why no new tests are needed for this 
patch.
                        Also please list what manual steps were performed to 
verify this patch.

    {color:green}+1 javac{color}.  The applied patch does not increase the 
total number of javac compiler warnings.

    {color:green}+1 release audit{color}.  The applied patch does not increase 
the total number of release audit warnings.

    {color:red}-1 lineLengths{color}.  The patch introduces the following lines 
longer than 100:
    +        IndexRebuildRegionScanner (final RegionScanner innerScanner, final 
Region region, final Scan scan,
+            maxBatchSize = config.getInt(MUTATE_BATCH_SIZE_ATTRIB, 
QueryServicesOptions.DEFAULT_MUTATE_BATCH_SIZE);
+            m.setAttribute(useProto ? PhoenixIndexCodec.INDEX_PROTO_MD : 
PhoenixIndexCodec.INDEX_MD, indexMetaData);
+                                if 
(KeyValue.Type.codeToType(cell.getTypeByte()) == KeyValue.Type.Put) {
+                            if (ServerUtil.readyToCommit(mutations.size(), 
mutations.byteSize(), maxBatchSize, maxBatchSizeBytes)) {
+                LOGGER.error("IOException during rebuilding: " + 
Throwables.getStackTraceAsString(e));
+            final Cell aggKeyValue = 
PhoenixKeyValueUtil.newKeyValue(UNGROUPED_AGG_ROW_KEY, SINGLE_COLUMN_FAMILY,
+    private RegionScanner rebuildIndices(final RegionScanner innerScanner, 
final Region region, final Scan scan,
+    public static final String INDEX_REBUILD_PAGE_SIZE_IN_ROWS = 
"phoenix.index.rebuild_page_size_in_rows";

     {color:red}-1 core tests{color}.  The patch failed these unit tests:
     
./phoenix-core/target/failsafe-reports/TEST-org.apache.phoenix.end2end.StatsEnabledSplitSystemCatalogIT
./phoenix-core/target/failsafe-reports/TEST-org.apache.phoenix.end2end.ConcurrentMutationsExtendedIT

Test results: 
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-PHOENIX-Build/3061//testReport/
Console output: 
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-PHOENIX-Build/3061//console

This message is automatically generated.

> IndexTool mapper task should not timeout 
> -----------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: PHOENIX-5478
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-5478
>             Project: Phoenix
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 5.0.0, 4.15.0
>            Reporter: Kadir OZDEMIR
>            Assignee: Kadir OZDEMIR
>            Priority: Major
>         Attachments: PHOENIX-5478.master.001.patch, 
> PHOENIX-5478.master.002.patch, PHOENIX-5478.master.003.patch
>
>          Time Spent: 2.5h
>  Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> In the old design, the IndexTool MR job mapper first scanned the data table 
> rows one by one using a Phoenix client code, then constructed the index rows 
> and finally sent these row mutations to region servers to update the rows on 
> the index table regions. In the new design, this entire process is done on 
> the server side (within a coprocessor). So, the mapper just issues one RPC 
> call to instruct the coprocessor to build the entire table region. This RPC 
> call can timeout if the table region is large. The temporary solution that is 
> currently used is to set very large timeout values. We should break up single 
> table region rebuild into smaller operations and eliminate setting large 
> timeout values.



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

Reply via email to