Hello, I was going nuts over an issue where I would try to delete a single
column but a neighboring column (sorted by the column names in bytes) was
also being deleted because, I found out, the timestamp for the neighbor was
set to 0. Here are some of the columns in the row (taken from the shell
utility)

 

hbase(main):002:0> get 'mytable',
"\x00\x01\xAA\x50\x8E\xC4\x20\x00\x00\x01\x00\x00\xAC"

COLUMN                                  CELL

t:\x00\x17                             timestamp=1351533601998,
value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xB2\xDC[

t:\x00\x17\x03\xD7\x...(long name)     timestamp=0, value=\x00\x00\x... lots
of binary data....

t:\x03\xD7                             timestamp=1351533661458,
value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xB9\xD1\xE5

t:\x07\x97                             timestamp=1351533721758,
value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xBC#\xD0

t:\x0BW                                timestamp=1351533781738,
value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xBD\xB93

 

I wanted to delete the column "t:\x00\x17" but every time I did, the column
"t:\x00\x17\x03\xD7\x..." would also be deleted so that I'd wind up with:

 

hbase(main):005:0> get 'mytable',
"\x00\x01\xAA\x50\x8E\xC4\x20\x00\x00\x01\x00\x00\xAC"

COLUMN                                  CELL

t:\x03\xD7                             timestamp=1351533661458,
value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xB9\xD1\xE5

t:\x07\x97                             timestamp=1351533721758,
value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xBC#\xD0

t:\x0BW                                timestamp=1351533781738,
value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xBD\xB93

 

My JAVA code looked like this:

 

HTableInterface table = factory.createHTableInterface(config,
"mytable".getBytes());

Delete delete = new Delete(HexToBytes("0001AA508EC4200000010000AC"));

delete.deleteColumn("t".getBytes(), new byte[] { (byte) 0x00, (byte) 0x17
});

table.delete(delete);

 

as I was typing this out, I noticed that the column I didn't want to delete
had a timestamp of 0. I put the column back with a valid timestamp and tried
deleting the original column, and it worked properly. I fixed my code to
always provide a positive timestamp, but my question is, are timestamps set
to 0 valid for storing data in HBase? And if so, then this may be a bug that
needs addressing. Thanks!

Hi Chris

So you mean that you have explicitly set the timestamp to 0 for the column
which you did not want to delete?

Regards
Ram

On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 1:44 AM, Chris Larsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> Hello, I was going nuts over an issue where I would try to delete a single
> column but a neighboring column (sorted by the column names in bytes) was
> also being deleted because, I found out, the timestamp for the neighbor was
> set to 0. Here are some of the columns in the row (taken from the shell
> utility)
>
>
>
> hbase(main):002:0> get 'mytable',
> "\x00\x01\xAA\x50\x8E\xC4\x20\x00\x00\x01\x00\x00\xAC"
>
> COLUMN                                  CELL
>
> t:\x00\x17                             timestamp=1351533601998,
> value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xB2\xDC[
>
> t:\x00\x17\x03\xD7\x...(long name)     timestamp=0, value=\x00\x00\x...
> lots
> of binary data....
>
> t:\x03\xD7                             timestamp=1351533661458,
> value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xB9\xD1\xE5
>
> t:\x07\x97                             timestamp=1351533721758,
> value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xBC#\xD0
>
> t:\x0BW                                timestamp=1351533781738,
> value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xBD\xB93
>
>
>
> I wanted to delete the column "t:\x00\x17" but every time I did, the column
> "t:\x00\x17\x03\xD7\x..." would also be deleted so that I'd wind up with:
>
>
>
> hbase(main):005:0> get 'mytable',
> "\x00\x01\xAA\x50\x8E\xC4\x20\x00\x00\x01\x00\x00\xAC"
>
> COLUMN                                  CELL
>
> t:\x03\xD7                             timestamp=1351533661458,
> value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xB9\xD1\xE5
>
> t:\x07\x97                             timestamp=1351533721758,
> value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xBC#\xD0
>
> t:\x0BW                                timestamp=1351533781738,
> value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xBD\xB93
>
>
>
> My JAVA code looked like this:
>
>
>
> HTableInterface table = factory.createHTableInterface(config,
> "mytable".getBytes());
>
> Delete delete = new Delete(HexToBytes("0001AA508EC4200000010000AC"));
>
> delete.deleteColumn("t".getBytes(), new byte[] { (byte) 0x00, (byte) 0x17
> });
>
> table.delete(delete);
>
>
>
> as I was typing this out, I noticed that the column I didn't want to delete
> had a timestamp of 0. I put the column back with a valid timestamp and
> tried
> deleting the original column, and it worked properly. I fixed my code to
> always provide a positive timestamp, but my question is, are timestamps set
> to 0 valid for storing data in HBase? And if so, then this may be a bug
> that
> needs addressing. Thanks!
>
>

> So you mean that you have explicitly set the timestamp to 0 for the column
which you did not want to delete?

Yes, my code was setting the timestamp explicitly to 0. I fixed that bug in
my code (since I do want a valid timestamp) but I was wondering if a
timestamp of 0 is "legal" and if it isn't, maybe HBase should kick back
errors if someone tries it.

-----Original Message-----
From: ramkrishna vasudevan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2012 11:31 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Problem deleting neighboors with timestamp=0

Hi Chris

So you mean that you have explicitly set the timestamp to 0 for the column
which you did not want to delete?

Regards
Ram

On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 1:44 AM, Chris Larsen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> Hello, I was going nuts over an issue where I would try to delete a
> single column but a neighboring column (sorted by the column names in
> bytes) was also being deleted because, I found out, the timestamp for
> the neighbor was set to 0. Here are some of the columns in the row
> (taken from the shell
> utility)
>
>
>
> hbase(main):002:0> get 'mytable',
> "\x00\x01\xAA\x50\x8E\xC4\x20\x00\x00\x01\x00\x00\xAC"
>
> COLUMN                                  CELL
>
> t:\x00\x17                             timestamp=1351533601998,
> value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xB2\xDC[
>
> t:\x00\x17\x03\xD7\x...(long name)     timestamp=0, value=\x00\x00\x...
> lots
> of binary data....
>
> t:\x03\xD7                             timestamp=1351533661458,
> value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xB9\xD1\xE5
>
> t:\x07\x97                             timestamp=1351533721758,
> value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xBC#\xD0
>
> t:\x0BW                                timestamp=1351533781738,
> value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xBD\xB93
>
>
>
> I wanted to delete the column "t:\x00\x17" but every time I did, the
> column "t:\x00\x17\x03\xD7\x..." would also be deleted so that I'd wind up
with:
>
>
>
> hbase(main):005:0> get 'mytable',
> "\x00\x01\xAA\x50\x8E\xC4\x20\x00\x00\x01\x00\x00\xAC"
>
> COLUMN                                  CELL
>
> t:\x03\xD7                             timestamp=1351533661458,
> value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xB9\xD1\xE5
>
> t:\x07\x97                             timestamp=1351533721758,
> value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xBC#\xD0
>
> t:\x0BW                                timestamp=1351533781738,
> value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xBD\xB93
>
>
>
> My JAVA code looked like this:
>
>
>
> HTableInterface table = factory.createHTableInterface(config,
> "mytable".getBytes());
>
> Delete delete = new Delete(HexToBytes("0001AA508EC4200000010000AC"));
>
> delete.deleteColumn("t".getBytes(), new byte[] { (byte) 0x00, (byte)
> 0x17 });
>
> table.delete(delete);
>
>
>
> as I was typing this out, I noticed that the column I didn't want to
> delete had a timestamp of 0. I put the column back with a valid
> timestamp and tried deleting the original column, and it worked
> properly. I fixed my code to always provide a positive timestamp, but
> my question is, are timestamps set to 0 valid for storing data in
> HBase? And if so, then this may be a bug that needs addressing.
> Thanks!
>
>

Hi Chris,

My two cents...
IMHO, onus of ensuring the right Timestamp value should always be on the
application logic rather than HBase. Essentially, timestamp is long number
in HBase. So, Timestamp with value of '0' seems to be a valid value. What
if someone really wants to use the value 0 as timestamp? HBase is used by a
variety of users in quite different use cases. So, i dont think it would be
a good idea of introducing this restriction.

HTH,
Anil
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 9:45 PM, Chris Larsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> > So you mean that you have explicitly set the timestamp to 0 for the
> column
> which you did not want to delete?
>
> Yes, my code was setting the timestamp explicitly to 0. I fixed that bug in
> my code (since I do want a valid timestamp) but I was wondering if a
> timestamp of 0 is "legal" and if it isn't, maybe HBase should kick back
> errors if someone tries it.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ramkrishna vasudevan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2012 11:31 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Problem deleting neighboors with timestamp=0
>
> Hi Chris
>
> So you mean that you have explicitly set the timestamp to 0 for the column
> which you did not want to delete?
>
> Regards
> Ram
>
> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 1:44 AM, Chris Larsen
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
> > Hello, I was going nuts over an issue where I would try to delete a
> > single column but a neighboring column (sorted by the column names in
> > bytes) was also being deleted because, I found out, the timestamp for
> > the neighbor was set to 0. Here are some of the columns in the row
> > (taken from the shell
> > utility)
> >
> >
> >
> > hbase(main):002:0> get 'mytable',
> > "\x00\x01\xAA\x50\x8E\xC4\x20\x00\x00\x01\x00\x00\xAC"
> >
> > COLUMN                                  CELL
> >
> > t:\x00\x17                             timestamp=1351533601998,
> > value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xB2\xDC[
> >
> > t:\x00\x17\x03\xD7\x...(long name)     timestamp=0, value=\x00\x00\x...
> > lots
> > of binary data....
> >
> > t:\x03\xD7                             timestamp=1351533661458,
> > value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xB9\xD1\xE5
> >
> > t:\x07\x97                             timestamp=1351533721758,
> > value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xBC#\xD0
> >
> > t:\x0BW                                timestamp=1351533781738,
> > value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xBD\xB93
> >
> >
> >
> > I wanted to delete the column "t:\x00\x17" but every time I did, the
> > column "t:\x00\x17\x03\xD7\x..." would also be deleted so that I'd wind
> up
> with:
> >
> >
> >
> > hbase(main):005:0> get 'mytable',
> > "\x00\x01\xAA\x50\x8E\xC4\x20\x00\x00\x01\x00\x00\xAC"
> >
> > COLUMN                                  CELL
> >
> > t:\x03\xD7                             timestamp=1351533661458,
> > value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xB9\xD1\xE5
> >
> > t:\x07\x97                             timestamp=1351533721758,
> > value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xBC#\xD0
> >
> > t:\x0BW                                timestamp=1351533781738,
> > value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xBD\xB93
> >
> >
> >
> > My JAVA code looked like this:
> >
> >
> >
> > HTableInterface table = factory.createHTableInterface(config,
> > "mytable".getBytes());
> >
> > Delete delete = new Delete(HexToBytes("0001AA508EC4200000010000AC"));
> >
> > delete.deleteColumn("t".getBytes(), new byte[] { (byte) 0x00, (byte)
> > 0x17 });
> >
> > table.delete(delete);
> >
> >
> >
> > as I was typing this out, I noticed that the column I didn't want to
> > delete had a timestamp of 0. I put the column back with a valid
> > timestamp and tried deleting the original column, and it worked
> > properly. I fixed my code to always provide a positive timestamp, but
> > my question is, are timestamps set to 0 valid for storing data in
> > HBase? And if so, then this may be a bug that needs addressing.
> > Thanks!
> >
> >
>
>
--
Thanks & Regards,
Anil Gupta

> IMHO, onus of ensuring the right Timestamp value should always be on the
application logic rather than HBase. Essentially,
> timestamp is long number in HBase. So, Timestamp with value of '0' seems
to be a valid value. What if someone really wants to use
> the value 0 as timestamp? HBase is used by a variety of users in quite
different use cases. So, i dont think it would be a good idea of
> introducing this restriction.

That'd be fine with me. I'll file a bug report then in Jira. Thanks!

-----Original Message-----
From: anil gupta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2012 2:45 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Problem deleting neighboors with timestamp=0

Hi Chris,

My two cents...
IMHO, onus of ensuring the right Timestamp value should always be on the
application logic rather than HBase. Essentially, timestamp is long number
in HBase. So, Timestamp with value of '0' seems to be a valid value. What if
someone really wants to use the value 0 as timestamp? HBase is used by a
variety of users in quite different use cases. So, i dont think it would be
a good idea of introducing this restriction.

HTH,
Anil
On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 9:45 PM, Chris Larsen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> > So you mean that you have explicitly set the timestamp to 0 for the
> column
> which you did not want to delete?
>
> Yes, my code was setting the timestamp explicitly to 0. I fixed that
> bug in my code (since I do want a valid timestamp) but I was wondering
> if a timestamp of 0 is "legal" and if it isn't, maybe HBase should
> kick back errors if someone tries it.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ramkrishna vasudevan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2012 11:31 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Problem deleting neighboors with timestamp=0
>
> Hi Chris
>
> So you mean that you have explicitly set the timestamp to 0 for the
> column which you did not want to delete?
>
> Regards
> Ram
>
> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 1:44 AM, Chris Larsen
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
> > Hello, I was going nuts over an issue where I would try to delete a
> > single column but a neighboring column (sorted by the column names
> > in
> > bytes) was also being deleted because, I found out, the timestamp
> > for the neighbor was set to 0. Here are some of the columns in the
> > row (taken from the shell
> > utility)
> >
> >
> >
> > hbase(main):002:0> get 'mytable',
> > "\x00\x01\xAA\x50\x8E\xC4\x20\x00\x00\x01\x00\x00\xAC"
> >
> > COLUMN                                  CELL
> >
> > t:\x00\x17                             timestamp=1351533601998,
> > value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xB2\xDC[
> >
> > t:\x00\x17\x03\xD7\x...(long name)     timestamp=0, value=\x00\x00\x...
> > lots
> > of binary data....
> >
> > t:\x03\xD7                             timestamp=1351533661458,
> > value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xB9\xD1\xE5
> >
> > t:\x07\x97                             timestamp=1351533721758,
> > value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xBC#\xD0
> >
> > t:\x0BW                                timestamp=1351533781738,
> > value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xBD\xB93
> >
> >
> >
> > I wanted to delete the column "t:\x00\x17" but every time I did, the
> > column "t:\x00\x17\x03\xD7\x..." would also be deleted so that I'd
> > wind
> up
> with:
> >
> >
> >
> > hbase(main):005:0> get 'mytable',
> > "\x00\x01\xAA\x50\x8E\xC4\x20\x00\x00\x01\x00\x00\xAC"
> >
> > COLUMN                                  CELL
> >
> > t:\x03\xD7                             timestamp=1351533661458,
> > value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xB9\xD1\xE5
> >
> > t:\x07\x97                             timestamp=1351533721758,
> > value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xBC#\xD0
> >
> > t:\x0BW                                timestamp=1351533781738,
> > value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xBD\xB93
> >
> >
> >
> > My JAVA code looked like this:
> >
> >
> >
> > HTableInterface table = factory.createHTableInterface(config,
> > "mytable".getBytes());
> >
> > Delete delete = new
> > Delete(HexToBytes("0001AA508EC4200000010000AC"));
Thanks & Regards,
Anil Gupta

Hi Chris
So you are going to file a bug saying why 0 timestamp entry was allowed? or
why the delete command deleted the row with 0 timestamp also when that row
was not specified in the delete command?

Regards
Ram

On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 9:54 PM, Chris Larsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> > IMHO, onus of ensuring the right Timestamp value should always be on the
> application logic rather than HBase. Essentially,
> > timestamp is long number in HBase. So, Timestamp with value of '0' seems
> to be a valid value. What if someone really wants to use
> > the value 0 as timestamp? HBase is used by a variety of users in quite
> different use cases. So, i dont think it would be a good idea of
> > introducing this restriction.
>
> That'd be fine with me. I'll file a bug report then in Jira. Thanks!
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: anil gupta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, November 19, 2012 2:45 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Problem deleting neighboors with timestamp=0
>
> Hi Chris,
>
> My two cents...
> IMHO, onus of ensuring the right Timestamp value should always be on the
> application logic rather than HBase. Essentially, timestamp is long number
> in HBase. So, Timestamp with value of '0' seems to be a valid value. What
> if
> someone really wants to use the value 0 as timestamp? HBase is used by a
> variety of users in quite different use cases. So, i dont think it would be
> a good idea of introducing this restriction.
>
> HTH,
> Anil
>
>
> On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 9:45 PM, Chris Larsen
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
> > > So you mean that you have explicitly set the timestamp to 0 for the
> > column
> > which you did not want to delete?
> >
> > Yes, my code was setting the timestamp explicitly to 0. I fixed that
> > bug in my code (since I do want a valid timestamp) but I was wondering
> > if a timestamp of 0 is "legal" and if it isn't, maybe HBase should
> > kick back errors if someone tries it.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ramkrishna vasudevan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2012 11:31 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: Problem deleting neighboors with timestamp=0
> >
> > Hi Chris
> >
> > So you mean that you have explicitly set the timestamp to 0 for the
> > column which you did not want to delete?
> >
> > Regards
> > Ram
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 1:44 AM, Chris Larsen
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> >
> > > Hello, I was going nuts over an issue where I would try to delete a
> > > single column but a neighboring column (sorted by the column names
> > > in
> > > bytes) was also being deleted because, I found out, the timestamp
> > > for the neighbor was set to 0. Here are some of the columns in the
> > > row (taken from the shell
> > > utility)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > hbase(main):002:0> get 'mytable',
> > > "\x00\x01\xAA\x50\x8E\xC4\x20\x00\x00\x01\x00\x00\xAC"
> > >
> > > COLUMN                                  CELL
> > >
> > > t:\x00\x17                             timestamp=1351533601998,
> > > value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xB2\xDC[
> > >
> > > t:\x00\x17\x03\xD7\x...(long name)     timestamp=0, value=\x00\x00\x...
> > > lots
> > > of binary data....
> > >
> > > t:\x03\xD7                             timestamp=1351533661458,
> > > value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xB9\xD1\xE5
> > >
> > > t:\x07\x97                             timestamp=1351533721758,
> > > value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xBC#\xD0
> > >
> > > t:\x0BW                                timestamp=1351533781738,
> > > value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xBD\xB93
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I wanted to delete the column "t:\x00\x17" but every time I did, the
> > > column "t:\x00\x17\x03\xD7\x..." would also be deleted so that I'd
> > > wind
> > up
> > with:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > hbase(main):005:0> get 'mytable',
> > > "\x00\x01\xAA\x50\x8E\xC4\x20\x00\x00\x01\x00\x00\xAC"
> > >
> > > COLUMN                                  CELL
> > >
> > > t:\x03\xD7                             timestamp=1351533661458,

> So you are going to file a bug saying why 0 timestamp entry was allowed?
or why the delete command deleted the row with 0
> timestamp also when that row was not specified in the delete command?

For the delete command so that rows with a ts=0 are not marked for deletion
inadvertently. Thanks Ram.

-----Original Message-----
From: ramkrishna vasudevan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2012 1:15 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Problem deleting neighboors with timestamp=0

Hi Chris
So you are going to file a bug saying why 0 timestamp entry was allowed? or
why the delete command deleted the row with 0 timestamp also when that row
was not specified in the delete command?

Regards
Ram

On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 9:54 PM, Chris Larsen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> > IMHO, onus of ensuring the right Timestamp value should always be on
> > the
> application logic rather than HBase. Essentially,
> > timestamp is long number in HBase. So, Timestamp with value of '0'
> > seems
> to be a valid value. What if someone really wants to use
> > the value 0 as timestamp? HBase is used by a variety of users in
> > quite
> different use cases. So, i dont think it would be a good idea of
> > introducing this restriction.
>
> That'd be fine with me. I'll file a bug report then in Jira. Thanks!
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: anil gupta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, November 19, 2012 2:45 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Problem deleting neighboors with timestamp=0
>
> Hi Chris,
>
> My two cents...
> IMHO, onus of ensuring the right Timestamp value should always be on
> the application logic rather than HBase. Essentially, timestamp is
> long number in HBase. So, Timestamp with value of '0' seems to be a
> valid value. What if someone really wants to use the value 0 as
> timestamp? HBase is used by a variety of users in quite different use
> cases. So, i dont think it would be a good idea of introducing this
> restriction.
>
> HTH,
> Anil
>
>
> On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 9:45 PM, Chris Larsen
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
> > > So you mean that you have explicitly set the timestamp to 0 for
> > > the
> > column
> > which you did not want to delete?
> >
> > Yes, my code was setting the timestamp explicitly to 0. I fixed that
> > bug in my code (since I do want a valid timestamp) but I was
> > wondering if a timestamp of 0 is "legal" and if it isn't, maybe
> > HBase should kick back errors if someone tries it.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ramkrishna vasudevan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2012 11:31 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: Problem deleting neighboors with timestamp=0
> >
> > Hi Chris
> >
> > So you mean that you have explicitly set the timestamp to 0 for the
> > column which you did not want to delete?
> >
> > Regards
> > Ram
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 1:44 AM, Chris Larsen
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> >
> > > Hello, I was going nuts over an issue where I would try to delete
> > > a single column but a neighboring column (sorted by the column
> > > names in
> > > bytes) was also being deleted because, I found out, the timestamp
> > > for the neighbor was set to 0. Here are some of the columns in the
> > > row (taken from the shell
> > > utility)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > hbase(main):002:0> get 'mytable',
> > > "\x00\x01\xAA\x50\x8E\xC4\x20\x00\x00\x01\x00\x00\xAC"
> > >
> > > COLUMN                                  CELL
> > >
> > > t:\x00\x17                             timestamp=1351533601998,
> > > value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xB2\xDC[
> > >
> > > t:\x00\x17\x03\xD7\x...(long name)     timestamp=0,
value=\x00\x00\x...
> > > lots
> > > of binary data....
> > >
> > > t:\x03\xD7                             timestamp=1351533661458,
> > > value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xB9\xD1\xE5
> > >
> > > t:\x07\x97                             timestamp=1351533721758,
>

Filed: HBASE-7189

-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Larsen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2012 3:41 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Problem deleting neighboors with timestamp=0

> So you are going to file a bug saying why 0 timestamp entry was allowed?
or why the delete command deleted the row with 0
> timestamp also when that row was not specified in the delete command?

For the delete command so that rows with a ts=0 are not marked for deletion
inadvertently. Thanks Ram.

-----Original Message-----
From: ramkrishna vasudevan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2012 1:15 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Problem deleting neighboors with timestamp=0

Hi Chris
So you are going to file a bug saying why 0 timestamp entry was allowed? or
why the delete command deleted the row with 0 timestamp also when that row
was not specified in the delete command?

Regards
Ram

On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 9:54 PM, Chris Larsen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> > IMHO, onus of ensuring the right Timestamp value should always be on
> > the
> application logic rather than HBase. Essentially,
> > timestamp is long number in HBase. So, Timestamp with value of '0'
> > seems
> to be a valid value. What if someone really wants to use
> > the value 0 as timestamp? HBase is used by a variety of users in
> > quite
> different use cases. So, i dont think it would be a good idea of
> > introducing this restriction.
>
> That'd be fine with me. I'll file a bug report then in Jira. Thanks!
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: anil gupta [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, November 19, 2012 2:45 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Problem deleting neighboors with timestamp=0
>
> Hi Chris,
>
> My two cents...
> IMHO, onus of ensuring the right Timestamp value should always be on
> the application logic rather than HBase. Essentially, timestamp is
> long number in HBase. So, Timestamp with value of '0' seems to be a
> valid value. What if someone really wants to use the value 0 as
> timestamp? HBase is used by a variety of users in quite different use
> cases. So, i dont think it would be a good idea of introducing this
> restriction.
>
> HTH,
> Anil
>
>
> On Sun, Nov 18, 2012 at 9:45 PM, Chris Larsen
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
> > > So you mean that you have explicitly set the timestamp to 0 for
> > > the
> > column
> > which you did not want to delete?
> >
> > Yes, my code was setting the timestamp explicitly to 0. I fixed that
> > bug in my code (since I do want a valid timestamp) but I was
> > wondering if a timestamp of 0 is "legal" and if it isn't, maybe
> > HBase should kick back errors if someone tries it.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ramkrishna vasudevan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2012 11:31 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: Problem deleting neighboors with timestamp=0
> >
> > Hi Chris
> >
> > So you mean that you have explicitly set the timestamp to 0 for the
> > column which you did not want to delete?
> >
> > Regards
> > Ram
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 1:44 AM, Chris Larsen
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> >
> > > Hello, I was going nuts over an issue where I would try to delete
> > > a single column but a neighboring column (sorted by the column
> > > names in
> > > bytes) was also being deleted because, I found out, the timestamp
> > > for the neighbor was set to 0. Here are some of the columns in the
> > > row (taken from the shell
> > > utility)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > hbase(main):002:0> get 'mytable',
> > > "\x00\x01\xAA\x50\x8E\xC4\x20\x00\x00\x01\x00\x00\xAC"
> > >
> > > COLUMN                                  CELL
> > >
> > > t:\x00\x17                             timestamp=1351533601998,
> > > value=\x00\x00\x00\x00O\xB2\xDC[
> > >
> > > t:\x00\x17\x03\xD7\x...(long name)     timestamp=0,
value=\x00\x00\x...
> > > lots