[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-5791?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17067373#comment-17067373 ]
Hadoop QA commented on PHOENIX-5791: ------------------------------------ {color:red}-1 overall{color}. Here are the results of testing the latest attachment http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12997778/PHOENIX-5791.4.x-HBase-1.5.001.patch against 4.x-HBase-1.5 branch at commit 14a17d8f9b23089bea4c2a910430a73c669bc0fb. ATTACHMENT ID: 12997778 {color:green}+1 @author{color}. The patch does not contain any @author tags. {color:green}+1 tests included{color}. The patch appears to include 25 new or modified tests. {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: + private long verifyIndexTable(String tableName, String indexName, Connection conn) throws Exception { + // Now we rebuild the entire index table and expect that it is still good after the full rebuild + long actualRowCountAfterCompaction = IndexScrutiny.scrutinizeIndex(conn, tableName, indexName); + + "(k1 INTEGER NOT NULL, k2 INTEGER NOT NULL, a.v1 INTEGER, b.v2 INTEGER, c.v3 INTEGER, d.v4 INTEGER," + + conn.createStatement().execute("CREATE INDEX " + indexName + " ON " + tableName + "(v1) INCLUDE(v2, v3)"); + + (RAND.nextBoolean() ? null : (RAND.nextInt() % nIndexValues)) + ", " + + "(k1 INTEGER NOT NULL, k2 INTEGER NOT NULL, a.v1 INTEGER, b.v2 INTEGER, c.v3 INTEGER, d.v4 INTEGER," + + conn.createStatement().execute("CREATE INDEX " + indexName + " ON " + tableName + "(v1) INCLUDE(v2, v3)"); + "UPSERT INTO " + tableName + " (k1, k2, b.v2, c.v3, d.v4) VALUES (" + + (RAND.nextBoolean() ? null : RAND.nextInt()) + ", " {color:red}-1 core tests{color}. The patch failed these unit tests: ./phoenix-core/target/failsafe-reports/TEST-org.apache.phoenix.end2end.ConcurrentMutationsExtendedIT Test results: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-PHOENIX-Build/3661//testReport/ Console output: https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-PHOENIX-Build/3661//console This message is automatically generated. > Eliminate false invalid row detection due to concurrent updates > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: PHOENIX-5791 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-5791 > Project: Phoenix > Issue Type: Sub-task > Reporter: Kadir OZDEMIR > Assignee: Kadir OZDEMIR > Priority: Major > Attachments: PHOENIX-5791.4.x-HBase-1.5.001.patch > > Time Spent: 2h 40m > Remaining Estimate: 0h > > IndexTool verification generates an expected list of index mutations from the > data table rows and uses this list to check if index table rows are > consistent with the data table. To do that it follows the following steps: > # The data table rows are scanned with a raw scan. This raw scan is > configured to read all versions of rows. > # For each scanned row, the cells that are scanned are grouped into two > sets: put and delete. The put set is the set of put cells and the delete set > is the set of delete cells. > # The put and delete sets for a given row are further grouped based on their > timestamps into put and delete mutations such that all the cells in a > mutation have the timestamp. > # The put and delete mutations are then sorted within a single list. > Mutations in this list are sorted in ascending order of their timestamp. > The above process assumes that for each data table update, the index table > will be updated with the correct index row key. However, this assumption does > not hold in the presence of concurrent updates. > From the consistent indexing design (PHOENIX-5156) perspective, two or more > pending updates from different batches on the same data row are concurrent if > and only if for all of these updates the data table row state is read from > HBase under the row lock and for none of them the row lock has been acquired > the second time for updating the data table. In other words, all of them are > in the first update phase concurrently. For concurrent updates, the first two > update phases are done but the last update phase is skipped. This means the > data table row will be updated by these updates but the corresponding index > table rows will be left with the unverified status. Then, the read repair > process will repair these unverified index rows during scans. > Since expected index mutations are derived from the data table row after > these concurrent mutations are applied, the expected list would not match > with the actual list of index mutations. > -- This message was sent by Atlassian Jira (v8.3.4#803005)