[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-5651?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17009338#comment-17009338
 ] 

Hadoop QA commented on PHOENIX-5651:
------------------------------------

{color:red}-1 overall{color}.  Here are the results of testing the latest 
attachment 
  
http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12990053/PHOENIX-5651.4.x-HBase-1.3.v1.patch
  against 4.x-HBase-1.3 branch at commit 
7bcc9bc89bbe86eedbf8223d101dadb3cf57cc4c.
  ATTACHMENT ID: 12990053

    {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:red}-1 release audit{color}.  The applied patch generated 1 release 
audit warnings (more than the master's current 0 warnings).

    {color:red}-1 lineLengths{color}.  The patch introduces the following lines 
longer than 100:
    +        Set<Map.Entry<String, Pair<Long, List<Object>>>> entrySet = 
targetPkToSourceValues.entrySet();
+        String fullTableName = 
SchemaUtil.getQualifiedTableName(psourceTable.getSchemaName().toString(),
+        long ttl = 
tableDesc.getFamily(SchemaUtil.getEmptyColumnFamily(psourceTable)).getTimeToLive();
+    protected Map<String, Pair<Long, List<Object>>> 
buildTargetStatement(PreparedStatement targetStatement)
+    protected void writeToOutputTable(Context context, List<Object> 
sourceValues, List<Object> targetValues, long sourceTS, long targetTS)
+                String basePath, long outputMaxRows, String tenantId, 
Class<IndexScrutinyMapperForTest> mapperClass) {
+                SourceTable sourceTable, Class<IndexScrutinyMapperForTest> 
mapperClass) throws Exception {
+        private Job configureSubmittableJob(Job job, Path outputPath, 
Class<IndexScrutinyMapperForTest> mapperClass) throws Exception {
+                            outputInvalidRows, outputFormat, basePath, 
outputMaxRows, tenantId, mapperClass);

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

Test results: 
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-PHOENIX-Build/3238//testReport/
Release audit warnings: 
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-PHOENIX-Build/3238//artifact/patchprocess/patchReleaseAuditWarnings.txt
Console output: 
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-PHOENIX-Build/3238//console

This message is automatically generated.

> IndexScrutiny does not handle TTL/row-expiry
> --------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: PHOENIX-5651
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-5651
>             Project: Phoenix
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 4.15.1, 4.14.3
>            Reporter: Priyank Porwal
>            Assignee: Swaroopa Kadam
>            Priority: Major
>         Attachments: PHOENIX-5651.4.x-HBase-1.3.patch, 
> PHOENIX-5651.4.x-HBase-1.3.v1.patch
>
>          Time Spent: 3h
>  Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> If a data-table has TTL on it, it's indexes inherit the TTL too. Hence when 
> we run IndexScrutiny on such tables and it's indexes, scrutiny's attempts to 
> find matching index rows for near-expiry data rows results in no-matches 
> since the index row gets expired before the read from data-region mapper. The 
> same happens in the MR job for the other direction Index->Data.
> This does not impact correctness of indexing design, but makes it very 
> inconvenient to get a clean scrutiny run. All reported invalid rows have to 
> be matched against the table TTL, which is non-trivial exercise.
> IndexScrutiny itself could detect such expired rows when the matching pair is 
> not found and not report them as INVALID_ROWS. Perhaps a new counter for 
> EXPIRED_ROWS should be added as well for better visibility. 



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

Reply via email to