Hi Ted,
Thank you for your response.
I found a machine with HBase 1.0.0 and tried the script with all 6 coprocs
you listed (2 in master, and 4 in RS). I still do not see the row after the
second scan.
However my cluster is not secure enabled I think. Is that necessary? I am
not sure how to do that, though I can ask other members of my team and try
it if that will help.
It will be ideal if we could get this to work on a 1.0 based version.
Moving to 1.1 will take more time since we have some dependencies.
Thank you
Suresh
15/10/10 19:20:44 INFO Configuration.deprecation: hadoop.native.lib is
deprecated. Instead, use io.native.lib.available
HBase Shell; enter 'help<RETURN>' for list of supported commands.
Type "exit<RETURN>" to leave the HBase Shell
Version 1.0.0-cdh5.4.4, rUnknown, Mon Jul 6 16:59:55 PDT 2015
*hbase(main):001:0> create 'visibilityTest', 'f1' *
*0 row(s) in 0.5460 seconds*
*=> Hbase::Table - visibilityTest*
*hbase(main):002:0> put 'visibilityTest', 'r1', 'f1:c1', 'value1' *
*0 row(s) in 0.0670 seconds*
*hbase(main):003:0> deleteall 'visibilityTest', 'r1' *
*0 row(s) in 0.0090 seconds*
*hbase(main):004:0> put 'visibilityTest', 'r1', 'f1:c1', 'value2'*
*0 row(s) in 0.0040 seconds*
*hbase(main):005:0> scan 'visibilityTest'*
*ROW COLUMN+CELL
*
*0 row(s) in 0.0160 seconds*
*hbase(main):006:0> scan 'visibilityTest', {RAW=>TRUE}*
*ROW COLUMN+CELL
*
* r1 column=f1:, timestamp=1444530064056,
type=DeleteFamily *
* r1 column=f1:c1, timestamp=1444530064084, value=value2
*
*1 row(s) in 0.0580 seconds*
*hbase(main):007:0> exit*
On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 7:26 PM, Ted Yu <[email protected]> wrote:
> I tried the sequence of commands from your example on a secure 1.1.2
> cluster with the following config:
>
> <property>
> <name>hbase.coprocessor.master.classes</name>
>
>
> <value>org.apache.hadoop.hbase.security.access.AccessController,org.apache.hadoop.hbase.security.visibility.VisibilityController</value>
> </property>
> <property>
> <name>hbase.coprocessor.region.classes</name>
>
> <value>org.apache.hadoop.hbase.security.token.TokenProvider,org.apache.hadoop.hbase.security.access.SecureBulkLoadEndpoint,org.apache.hadoop.hbase.security.access.AccessController,org.apache.hadoop.hbase.security.visibility.VisibilityController</value>
> </property>
>
> I got:
>
> hbase(main):005:0> scan 'visibilityTest'
> ROW COLUMN+CELL
> r1 column=f1:c1,
> timestamp=1444522994981, value=value2
> 1 row(s) in 0.1020 seconds
>
> Can you try again with 0.98.15 release whose vote passed Friday to see if
> what you observed can be reproduced ?
>
> Cheers
>
> On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 3:58 PM, Suresh Subbiah <
> [email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > When I run the following script from hbase shell the last scan returns no
> > rows
> >
> > create 'visibilityTest', 'f1'
> > put 'visibilityTest', 'r1', 'f1:c1', 'value1'
> > deleteall 'visibilityTest', 'r1'
> > put 'visibilityTest', 'r1', 'f1:c1', 'value2'
> > scan 'visibilityTest'
> >
> > *hbase(main):013:0> scan 'visibilityTest'*
> > *ROW COLUMN+CELL
> > *
> > *0 row(s) in 0.0100 seconds*
> >
> >
> > However if I run
> > scan 'visibilityTest' , {RAW=>TRUE}
> >
> > I see that the second row that I put is indeed there and has a timestamp
> > value higher that the previous delete
> >
> > *hbase(main):014:0> scan 'visibilityTest', {RAW=>TRUE}*
> > *ROW COLUMN+CELL
> > *
> > * r1 column=f1:, timestamp=1444516578296,
> > type=DeleteFamily *
> > * r1 column=f1:c1, timestamp=1444516647655,
> value=value2
> > *
> > *1 row(s) in 0.0110 seconds*
> >
> >
> >
> > This is on hbase 0.98.6. Problem is seen only when hbase-site.xml has
> > these lines. No other coprocessors were used during this test.
> >
> > <property>
> > <name>hbase.coprocessor.region.classes</name>
> >
> >
> >
> <value>org.apache.hadoop.hbase.security.visibility.VisibilityController</value>
> > </property>
> > <property>
> > <name>hbase.coprocessor.master.classes</name>
> >
> >
> >
> <value>org.apache.hadoop.hbase.security.visibility.VisibilityController</value>
> > </property>
> > <property>
> > <name>hfile.format.version</name>
> > <value>3</value>
> > </property>
> >
> > Any suggestions of what I may be doing incorrectly? Or is this a bug?
> >
> > Thank you
> > Suresh
> >
>
