[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-15071?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15086053#comment-15086053
 ] 

Andrew Purtell commented on HBASE-15071:
----------------------------------------

bq. So we should make all "pre" actions respect bypass returned (e.g. 
preDeleteTable did not return bypass, we should return it and respect it ), 
right? 

I recall discussions where it was thought allowing bypass in every circumstance 
wasn't the right thing to do. We have some hooks where bypass isn't allowed. 
This is documented in their Javadoc.

bq.  If so, maybe we should modify the semantic of bypass....

Can't do this in a minor release. Could do it for a major release. I do wonder 
if any coprocessor is making use of it. We could remove the semantic entirely 
for 2.0 and simplify some aspects of CPs a great deal.

> Cleanup bypass semantic in MasterCoprocessorHost
> ------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-15071
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-15071
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Task
>          Components: Coprocessors
>    Affects Versions: 2.0.0
>            Reporter: stack
>            Priority: Blocker
>
> Lets decide on this one before we release 2.0.0.
> A bunch of methods in MasterCoprocessorHost on the 'pre' step allow returning 
> true which indicates the method invocation is not to proceed.
> Not all 'pre' steps do this. Just some.
> Seems a little arbitrary.
> How we skip out if we are not proceed with the invocation is also a little 
> arbitrary.
> When a deleteColumn call is supposed to skip out, it returns a -1, a 
> non-procId. If we are to skip a balance call, we log that CP said skip and 
> then return false to indicate the balancer did not run (why?). Elsewhere we 
> just exit silently. In createNamespace we used to exit silently but 
> HBASE-14888 just changed it so we throw a BypassCoprocessorException 
> instead... 
> Lets make them all work the same way.
> (This issue comes of chat w/ Matteo)



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to