Are these times or ops/sec, or something else?
----- Original Message ----- From: Jean-Marc Spaggiari <[email protected]> To: [email protected]; lars hofhansl <[email protected]> Cc: Sent: Friday, July 5, 2013 8:24 PM Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] The 1st hbase 0.94.9 release candidate is available for download I have redo the tests and it's now all very consistent between all the recent versions Min Max Average Min80% Max80% Variance Precision hbase-0.94.5 914 1175 929 920 944 172 18.46% hbase-0.94.6 913 1176 927 915 954 174 18.80% hbase-0.94.7 913 1295 930 919 946 170 18.30% hbase-0.94.8 914 947 935 914 945 166 17.78% hbase-0.94.9 921 947 936 933 940 164 17.55% I will try to make the tests last longer to get more precise results... If we think a few nodes clusters is way beter for the performances tracking, then let's work that way. But if we think PE can do the job, it's even better ;) I just want to make sure we have accurate results and that we performance test the right things... I will re-run that, update the pdf and upload it again... JM 2013/7/4 lars hofhansl <[email protected]>: > Thanks for doing all this work! > > I did find a pretty high variance between the runs, which may be at issue > here. > > Maybe there are effects that only show on certain setups (disk drives, ram, > jvm version, etc). > > Maybe we can compare setups offline. > > -- Lars > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Jean-Marc Spaggiari <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Cc: > Sent: Thursday, July 4, 2013 9:25 AM > Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] The 1st hbase 0.94.9 release candidate is available > for download > > Ok. I get similar performances between 0.94.7 and 0.94.9 for the randomRead > > 0.94.7 => 1124179.9ms > 0.94.9 => 1110489.3ms > > I will re-run the tests one by one for all the 0.94.x versions and > update my charts... > > 2013/7/3 Jean-Marc Spaggiari <[email protected]>: >> Ok. Test pass if I run it alone: >> >> mvn clean test -P runSmallTests -Djava.net.preferIPv4Stack=true >> -Dtest=org.apache.hadoop.hbase.coprocessor.TestRegionObserverScannerOpenHook >> >> ------------------------------------------------------- >> T E S T S >> ------------------------------------------------------- >> Running org.apache.hadoop.hbase.coprocessor.TestRegionObserverScannerOpenHook >> Tests run: 3, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 11.642 sec >> >> Results : >> >> Tests run: 3, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0 >> >> >> >> And finally passed on another one: >> Results : >> >> Tests run: 1359, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 13 >> >> [INFO] >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> [INFO] BUILD SUCCESS >> [INFO] >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> [INFO] Total time: 1:33:34.925s >> [INFO] Finished at: Tue Jul 02 16:37:59 EDT 2013 >> [INFO] Final Memory: 44M/594M >> [INFO] >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> >> So it's all +1 for me. >> >> JM >> >> 2013/7/2 Elliott Clark <[email protected]>: >>> +1 >>> >>> untared. >>> Checked the sig. >>> Ran Ycsb. >>> Ran PE. >>> upgraded from 94.8. >>> >>> On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 11:32 AM, lars hofhansl <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> passes fine here too >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: Jean-Daniel Cryans <[email protected]> >>>> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >>>> Cc: >>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 2, 2013 11:22 AM >>>> Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] The 1st hbase 0.94.9 release candidate is available >>>> for download >>>> >>>> Yup: >>>> >>>> Running >>>> org.apache.hadoop.hbase.coprocessor.TestRegionObserverScannerOpenHook >>>> Tests run: 3, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 22.756 sec >>>> >>>> Have you looked at the log to see on what error it fails? >>>> >>>> J-D >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 11:08 AM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> JD, does TestRegionObserverScannerOpenHook work for you? >>>>> >>>>> I will retry to run it again on 3 different computers to see. >>>>> >>>>> JM >>>>> >>>>> 2013/7/1 lars hofhansl <[email protected]>: >>>>>> Hah. I let Cody answer here. I didn't like the empty table either, but >>>>>> he preferred it. >>>>>> >>>>>> -- Lars >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ________________________________ >>>>>> From: Jean-Daniel Cryans <[email protected]> >>>>>> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>; lars hofhansl >>>>>> <[email protected]> >>>>>> Sent: Monday, July 1, 2013 10:35 AM >>>>>> Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] The 1st hbase 0.94.9 release candidate is >>>>>> available for download >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I ran some PE single node tests on both tars, looked at the web UIs >>>>>> and logs. I'm +1 on this RC. >>>>>> >>>>>> My only nit is the way that HBASE-5083 leaves an empty table if there >>>>>> are not backup masters is kinda ugly. >>>>>> >>>>>> J-D >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 3:51 PM, lars hofhansl <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> The 1st 0.94.9 RC is available for download at >>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~larsh/hbase-0.94.9-rc0/ >>>>>>> Signed with my code signing key: C7CFE328 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Like the previous point releases, 0.94.9 is a primarily a bug fix >>>>>>> release. This RC is comparatively small with 26 issues resolved against >>>>>>> it: >>>>>>> [HBASE-8453] - TestImportExport failing again due to configuration >>>>>>>issues >>>>>>> [HBASE-8494] - TestRemoteAdmin#testClusterStatus should not assume >>>>>>>'requests' does not change >>>>>>> [HBASE-8522] - Archived hfiles and old hlogs may be deleted >>>>>>>immediately by HFileCleaner, LogCleaner in HMaster >>>>>>> [HBASE-8555] - FilterList correctness may be affected by random >>>>>>>ordering of sub-filter(list) >>>>>>> [HBASE-8590] - [0.94] BlockingMetaScannerVisitor should check for >>>>>>>parent meta entry while waiting for split daughter >>>>>>> [HBASE-8639] - Poor performance of htable#getscanner in >>>>>>>multithreaded environment due to DNS.getDefaultHost() being called in >>>>>>>ScannerCallable#prepare() >>>>>>> [HBASE-8640] - ServerName in master may not initialize with the >>>>>>>configured ipc address of hbase.master.ipc.address >>>>>>> [HBASE-8655] - Backport to 94 - HBASE-8346(Prefetching .META. rows >>>>>>>in case only when useCache is set to true) >>>>>>> [HBASE-8656] - Rpc call may not be notified in SecureClient >>>>>>> [HBASE-8671] - Per-region WAL breaks CP backwards compatibility in >>>>>>>0.94 for non-enabled case >>>>>>> [HBASE-8684] - Table Coprocessor can't access external HTable by >>>>>>>default >>>>>>> [HBASE-8700] - IntegrationTestBigLinkedList can fail due to random >>>>>>>number collision >>>>>>> [HBASE-8724] - [0.94] ExportSnapshot should not use hbase.tmp.dir >>>>>>>as a staging dir on hdfs >>>>>>> [HBASE-8742] - HTableDescriptor Properties not preserved when >>>>>>>cloning >>>>>>> [HBASE-8743] - upgrade hadoop-23 version to 0.23.7 >>>>>>> [HBASE-8749] - Potential race condition between >>>>>>>FSUtils.renameAndSetModifyTime() and HFile/LogCleaner >>>>>>> [HBASE-8762] - Performance/operational penalty when calling >>>>>>>HTable.get with a list of one Get >>>>>>> [HBASE-8783] - RSSnapshotManager.ZKProcedureMemberRpcs may be >>>>>>>initialized with the wrong server name >>>>>>> [HBASE-5083] - Backup HMaster should have http infoport open with >>>>>>>link to the active master >>>>>>> [HBASE-8609] - Make the CopyTable support startRow, stopRow options >>>>>>> [HBASE-8636] - Backport KeyValue Codec to 0.94 (HBASE-7413) >>>>>>> [HBASE-8683] - Add major compaction support in CompactionTool >>>>>>> [HBASE-8692] - [AccessController] Restrict HTableDescriptor >>>>>>>enumeration >>>>>>> [HBASE-8702] - Make WALEditCodec pluggable >>>>>>> [HBASE-8504] - HTable.getRegionsInRange() should provide a >>>>>>>non-cached API >>>>>>> [HBASE-8603] - Backport HBASE-6921 to 0.94 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The full list of changes is also available here: >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12324431 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Please try out the RC, check out the doc, take it for a spin, etc, and >>>>>>> vote +1/-1 by July 2nd on whether we should release this as 0.94.9. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The release testing spreadsheet is available here: >>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvLqcVIqNtlTdGFHaktDR0FqLWdtQWZwdncyVzE3Z2c#gid=0 >>>>>>> (if you test this release, please add your test to this spreadsheet, so >>>>>>> that we can gauge the coverage) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- Lars >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ps. I will likely be without access to the Internet for the next five >>>>>>> days >>>> >
