On 9 Oct 2018, at 23:12, Vincent Poon <email@example.com> wrote:We do need to update the docs after PHOENIX-3925, which changed the behavior from 'recommended' to 'mandatory'.I'll update the docs now.On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 1:08 PM Ankit Singhal <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:We do not allow atomic upsert and throw the corresponding exception in the cases documented under the limitations section of http://phoenix.apache.org/atomic_upsert.html. Probably a documentation needs a little touch to convey this clearly.On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 10:05 AM Josh Elser <email@example.com> wrote:Can you elaborate on what is unclear about the documentation? This
exception and the related documentation read as being in support of each
other to me.
On 10/9/18 5:39 AM, Batyrshin Alexander wrote:
> Hello all,
> Documentations (http://phoenix.apache.org/atomic_upsert.html) say:
> "Although global indexes on columns being atomically updated are supported, it’s not recommended as a potentially a separate RPC across the wire would be made while the row is under lock to maintain the secondary index."
> But in practice we get:
> CANNOT_USE_ON_DUP_KEY_WITH_GLOBAL_IDX(1224, "42Z24", "The ON DUPLICATE KEY clause may not be used when a table has a global index." )
> Is this bug or documentation is outdated?