[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17958?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15985989#comment-15985989
]
Duo Zhang commented on HBASE-17958:
-----------------------------------
Can avoid using lambda expression as I think the patch will also be applied to
branch-1.
And just call it 'trySkipTo' rather than 'optimizeSeekToSkip'? The name
'optimizeSeekToSkip' is bit confusing for me on whether we have done the skip
when returning true.
And I think there is a 'get' field in StoreScanner so we do not need to call
scan.isGetScan()? There are bytes comparison in the method.
Overall LGTM. +1.
> Avoid passing unexpected cell to ScanQueryMatcher when optimize SEEK to SKIP
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-17958
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17958
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Guanghao Zhang
> Assignee: Guanghao Zhang
> Attachments: 0001-add-one-ut-testWithColumnCountGetFilter.patch,
> HBASE-17958-v1.patch, HBASE-17958-v2.patch, HBASE-17958-v3.patch
>
>
> {code}
> ScanQueryMatcher.MatchCode qcode = matcher.match(cell);
> qcode = optimize(qcode, cell);
> {code}
> The optimize method may change the MatchCode from SEEK_NEXT_COL/SEEK_NEXT_ROW
> to SKIP. But it still pass the next cell to ScanQueryMatcher. It will get
> wrong result when use some filter, etc. ColumnCountGetFilter. It just count
> the columns's number. If pass a same column to this filter, the count result
> will be wrong. So we should avoid passing cell to ScanQueryMatcher when
> optimize SEEK to SKIP.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
