[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-3530?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14292152#comment-14292152
]
Jonathan Park commented on ACCUMULO-3530:
-----------------------------------------
I believe ACCUMULO-1568 can satisfy our use-case as well. I agree that I'm not
sure Fate locks are the way to go. Some way of obtaining a snapshot read of
table properties is sufficient.
> alterTable/NamespaceProperty should use Fate locks
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: ACCUMULO-3530
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-3530
> Project: Accumulo
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: John Vines
>
> Fate operations, such as clone table, have logic in place to ensure
> consistency as the operation occurs. However, operaitons like
> alterTableProperty can still interfere because there is no locking done. We
> should add identical locking to these methods in MasterClientServiceHandler
> to help ensure consistency.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
