I haven't tried, but it seems incredibly hacky and bound to generate more problems than it solves. Instead you could consider using different table names.
J-D On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 3:21 PM, Nanheng Wu <[email protected]> wrote: > What would happen if I try to remove the region files from hdfs and > then remove the regions from the meta table? Is hbase gonna get messed > up when it later needs to flush those regions out of the memstore? > Thanks! > > On Thursday, February 24, 2011, Jean-Daniel Cryans <[email protected]> > wrote: >> Exactly. >> >> J-D >> >> On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 2:45 PM, Nanheng Wu <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Sorry for trying to bring this topic back again guys, so currently in >>> 0.20.6 is there's no way to drop a table without large amount of >>> flushing? >>> >>> On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 3:04 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> Moving this discussion to jira: >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-3557 >>>> >>>> Good stuff guys. >>>> >>>> J-D >>>> >>>> On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 8:25 AM, Hari Sreekumar >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> I agree, and I have missed this a lot too. We should have a way to >>>>> directly >>>>> drop the table, it would help save a lot of time while developing >>>>> /testing. >>>>> Maybe also have a config entry to enable this behavior, like we have >>>>> webinterface.private.actions in hadoop. It can be enabled on the dev >>>>> cluster >>>>> and disabled on production etc. >>>>> >>>>> Hari >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Feb 21, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Lars George <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Could be having some "force" flag specified 3 times and asked for >>>>>> confirmation as well, but I like this feature. Whenever I talk to >>>>>> people who disable and get stuck it was to prepare a subsequent drop >>>>>> table call. So this sounds really useful given enough safety latches >>>>>> in place. >>>>>> >>>>>> Lars >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 1:50 AM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> > Actually I never thought of having a special case for that... and I >>>>>> > don't see any jira about it. Would you mind opening a new one for >>>>>> > that, I think it's a good idea for those times when you're developing >>>>>> > something and you want to iterate fast. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > On the other hand, it's a pretty destructive feature so some people >>>>>> > might disagree with having it in the codebase :) >>>>>> > >>>>>> > J-D >>>>>> > >>>>>> > On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 4:26 PM, Nanheng Wu <[email protected]> >>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>> >> Actually I wanted to disable the table so I can drop it. It would be >>>>>> >> nice to be able to disable the table without flushing memstore. It's >>>>>> >> not possible in 0.20.6 is it? >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>> To disable a region, it's memstore must first be flushed. That's done >>>>>> >>> sequentially for all regions that must be disabled inside a table. >>>>>> >>> There's not really a way around it unless you don't need that data. >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> If you're planning to disable a table but at the same time need it to >>>>>> >>> be unavailable for the shortest time possible, I recommend calling a >>>>>> >>> flush on the table from the shell first and then some time later >>>>>> >>> doing >>>>>> >>> the disable. How much later you ask? Well there's currently no easy >>>>>> >>> way to tell, I usually just tail any region server log file until I >>>>>> >>> see they're done. >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> J-D >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 2:21 PM, Nanheng Wu <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>> From time to time I run into issues where disabling a table pretty >>>>>> >
