That version doesn't have the fixes I referred to, and disabling large tables will likely hit the race condition.
J-D On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Jinsong Hu <jinsong...@hotmail.com> wrote: > unfortunately. I tried flush the table and disable, and then drop, and it > doesn't work. > I even wrote a utility to remove all records from the large table and then > do so, > and it doesn't work either. strangely. I looked at the web UI, and still see > many regions > even the number of rows in the table is 0. > > the hbase that I use is CDH3 's latest version, which is hbase 0.89 version > released > in June 2010. > > Jinsong > > > -------------------------------------------------- > From: "Jean-Daniel Cryans" <jdcry...@apache.org> > Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2010 11:36 AM > To: <user@hbase.apache.org> > Subject: Re: truncate large table suggestion > >> One trick is to pre- force flush the table. Also try out the new 0.89, >> it has 2 fixes regarding a race condition between the BaseScanner and >> the closing of regions. The release candidate is here >> http://people.apache.org/~jdcryans/hbase-0.89.20100830-candidate-1 >> >> J-D >> >> On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 11:28 AM, Jinsong Hu <jinsong...@hotmail.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, Team: >>> I have noticed that the truncate/drop table with large amount of data >>> fails >>> and actually corrupt the hbase. In the worse case, we can't even >>> create the table with the same name any more and I was forced to dump the >>> whole hbase records and recreate all tables again. >>> I noticed there is a rename command and I tried that one, it turns out >>> it >>> actually works. One problem it causes is that the hbase master run out of >>> memory after I run the command. but after restart it, I am able to >>> recreate >>> the table since the old table is renamed. >>> I then disable the renamed table and drop it, but it is not really >>> successful. the table disappears from the list command, but if I recreate >>> a >>> table with the new name, the shell says it exist already. the >>> regionserver >>> shows that they still have regions with the renamed table. >>> In the end, I have to write a utility to remove data from the renamed >>> table, I will try to see if this trick works although it is expensive. >>> >>> >>> Can the disable/truncate or drop for large table be fixed ? >>> >>> Jimmy. >>> >> >
