[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-3806?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16554278#comment-16554278
 ] 

Keith Turner commented on ACCUMULO-3806:
----------------------------------------

I have seen code where this is expected behavior.  Like launching lots of 
processes that all attempt to create a table or an app that always attempts to 
create a table on startup.  If ACCUMULO-3925 has not already handled this, I do 
not think it should create a warning.  The client code calling create table 
gets an exception and it knows exactly what happened based on the exception.

> Failing to create a table/namespace because it already exists should not be a 
> warning
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: ACCUMULO-3806
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-3806
>             Project: Accumulo
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: fate
>            Reporter: Josh Elser
>            Priority: Major
>              Labels: newbie
>             Fix For: 2.0.0
>
>         Attachments: 
> 0001-ACCUMULO-3806-changed-checkTableDoesNotExist-in-accu.patch
>
>
> This is a really common occurrence when you're running randomwalk:
> {noformat}
> Failed to execute Repo, tid=63d0421f1b17b04a
>       ThriftTableOperationException(tableId:null, tableName:nspc_001.ctt_000, 
> op:CREATE, type:EXISTS, description:null)
>               at 
> org.apache.accumulo.master.tableOps.Utils.checkTableDoesNotExist(Utils.java:54)
>               at 
> org.apache.accumulo.master.tableOps.PopulateZookeeper.call(PopulateZookeeper.java:54)
>               at 
> org.apache.accumulo.master.tableOps.PopulateZookeeper.call(PopulateZookeeper.java:30)
>               at 
> org.apache.accumulo.master.tableOps.TraceRepo.call(TraceRepo.java:57)
>               at 
> org.apache.accumulo.fate.Fate$TransactionRunner.run(Fate.java:72)
>               at 
> java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1145)
>               at 
> java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:615)
>               at 
> org.apache.accumulo.fate.util.LoggingRunnable.run(LoggingRunnable.java:35)
>               at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
> {noformat}
> Concurrent table creations run: only one succeeds and the others fail. This 
> is expected and what FATE was designed to handle. We shouldn't be pushing 
> these up to the monitor -- should probably be a info or debug message.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)

Reply via email to