[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-6090?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17181528#comment-17181528
]
Lars Hofhansl edited comment on PHOENIX-6090 at 8/21/20, 2:17 AM:
------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's a test that reliably reproduces this.
Generally I think we need more tests like this. This small test is nice because
it inserts, updates, in multiple concurrent batches, and that really stresses
any index implementation.
Also note that it is always the index that has more entries as if the index
deletes either do not get added or their timestamp is wrong.
was (Author: lhofhansl):
Here's a test that reliably reproduces this.
Generally I think we need more tests like this. This small test is nice because
it inserts, updates, in multiple concurrent batches, and that really stresses
any index implementation.
> Local indexes get out of sync in 5.1.0
> --------------------------------------
>
> Key: PHOENIX-6090
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-6090
> Project: Phoenix
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 5.1.0
> Reporter: Lars Hofhansl
> Assignee: Kadir OZDEMIR
> Priority: Blocker
> Fix For: 5.1.0
>
> Attachments: 6090-test-4.x.txt
>
>
> {code:java}
> > select /*+ NO_INDEX */ count(*) from test;
> +----------+
> | COUNT(1) |
> +----------+
> | 522244 |
> +----------+
> 1 row selected (1.213 seconds)
> > select count(*) from test;
> +---------+
> | COUNT(1) |
> +----------+
> | 522245 |
> +----------+
> 1 row selected (1.23 seconds)
> {code}
>
> This was after I did some insert and a bunch of splits (but not in parallel).
> It's not, yet, clear under what circumstances that exactly happens. Just that
> after a while it happens.
> This is Phoenix built from master and HBase built from branch-2.3. (Client
> and server versions of HBase are matching)
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
