Deprecating in favor of HBaseAdmin would work. Would you mind making a patch David? St.Ack
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 6:05 PM, Buttler, David <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks. > > I agree HBaseAdmin is probably the way to go. I guess what was unexpected > about this was that the static method HTable.isTableEnabled(tableName) really > creates a configuration object under the hood and uses that configuration > object to manage the connections. Maybe this method should be deprecated, > and instead point people to the HBaseAdmin (or at least the method with a > configuration as a parameter)? > > Dave > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jean-Daniel > Cryans > Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2011 6:01 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: HTable and threads > >> Do the static methods on HTable (like isTableEnabled), also have this >> problem? From the code it looks like if you naively call the static method >> without a Configuration object it will create a configuration and put it >> into a HashMap where it will live around forever. > > Good point then the better to do is to use HBaseAdmin.isTableEnabled. > >> This really bit me recently. Using the HTablePool doesn't really solve this >> because for some reason there is no meta operations on the HTableInterface >> object itself -- I can't ask if it is enabled. Is there any particular >> reason that this method only lives on an HConnectionManager? > > I think my previous answer will help you out. > > J-D >
