[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-6247?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17318373#comment-17318373
]
Hadoop QA commented on PHOENIX-6247:
------------------------------------
| (x) *{color:red}-1 overall{color}* |
\\
\\
|| Vote || Subsystem || Runtime || Comment ||
| {color:blue}0{color} | {color:blue} reexec {color} | {color:blue} 0m
0s{color} | {color:blue} Docker mode activated. {color} |
| {color:red}-1{color} | {color:red} patch {color} | {color:red} 0m 15s{color}
| {color:red} PHOENIX-6247 does not apply to master. Rebase required? Wrong
Branch? See
https://yetus.apache.org/documentation/in-progress/precommit-patchnames for
help. {color} |
\\
\\
|| Subsystem || Report/Notes ||
| JIRA Issue | PHOENIX-6247 |
| JIRA Patch URL |
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/13023637/PHOENIX-6247-4.x-merged.patch
|
| Console output |
https://ci-hadoop.apache.org/job/PreCommit-PHOENIX-Build/386/console |
| versions | git=2.17.1 |
| Powered by | Apache Yetus 0.12.0 https://yetus.apache.org |
This message was automatically generated.
> Change SYSTEM.CATALOG to allow separation of physical name (Hbase name) from
> logical name (Phoenix name)
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: PHOENIX-6247
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-6247
> Project: Phoenix
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Gokcen Iskender
> Assignee: Gokcen Iskender
> Priority: Major
> Attachments: PHOENIX-6247-4.x-merged.patch
>
>
> Currently, the tables in Phoenix have the same name as the underlying Hbase
> table. Separating logical and physical table name, ie. Having a Phoenix table
> point to an Hbase table with a different name have some advantages.
> An example is this: Let's say we want to have a different storage/encoding
> scheme for an index. We can build the new index while the clients use the old
> index and once the index is rebuilt, we can momentarily start pointing to the
> new index table without much downtime or performance implications. For the
> client, they are using the same index with the same name, but the physical
> table is different. Today, in order to change the index like this, we have to
> drop it and re-create which is a downtime for the index and the data table
> full scans are used for queries impacting performance while the index
> creation goes on.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
