Duo, What version on Hadoop did you use in the 5 node cluster for your comparisons? For what it's worth, I would also like to try out the PE/LTT comparison of both the clients. Or, if any other form of comparison would be helpful then I'm open for suggestions and would like to give it a try.
Sakthi On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 4:55 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com> wrote: > It will be transparent, mostly, the interface is still kept. There are some > incompatible behaviors, for example, now admin.split will wait till the > split is actually done, while in the old time it will return immediately > after we send the request to master. > > Jean-Marc Spaggiari <jean-m...@spaggiari.org>于2019年6月13日 周四23:26写道： > > > Hi, > > > > Is this going to change the way the client should be called? Or it will > be > > mostly transparent replacement? > > > > Thanks, > > > > JMS > > > > Le jeu. 13 juin 2019 à 02:13, 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com> a > > écrit : > > > > > Josh Elser <els...@apache.org> 于2019年6月12日周三 下午10:00写道： > > > > > > > Nice perf results! > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-22237 looks like it's > also > > > > good to be resolved, given > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://builds.apache.org/job/HBASE%20Nightly/job/HBASE-21512/279/testReport/ > > > > (TestLogLevel will be fixed on your rebase/merge). > > > > > > > > Poking through the PR, it looks like the big change is that we're > also > > > > defaulting over to use the [sync]ConnectionOverAsyncConnection. Good > to > > > > do it now to help iron things out more. Calling it out to make sure > > > > others see this. Is it still possible to use the old Connection impl? > > (I > > > > think the answer is "no"). > > > > > > > No, all the code have been purged... > > > > > > > > > > > Only other question: are there updates for the book that should > happen > > > > before you move past this? What about "knobs" for configuring > retries, > > > > internal thread pool(s)? Anything like that you think would be > > important > > > > for people to tweak? > > > > > > > Will fill a 'fat' release note soon. I think there will be less > > parameters > > > to tune, as we do not need any thread pools unless you are using > > > coprocessor related methods(which are deprecated and we recommend users > > to > > > use the ones in async client interface). The retry config is still the > > same > > > with the old sync client. > > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > > > > > On 6/11/19 5:48 AM, 张铎(Duo Zhang) wrote: > > > > > Filed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-22564 > > > > > > > > > > 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com> 于2019年6月11日周二 下午3:53写道： > > > > > > > > > >> Let me do a YCSB test about the performance. > > > > >> > > > > >> Stack <st...@duboce.net> 于2019年6月11日周二 下午1:15写道： > > > > >> > > > > >>> +1 on merge from me. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> It removes the complicated multi-threaded edifice we'd built > > > > client-side > > > > >>> to > > > > >>> fake an async behavior replacing it with an actual async > > > > implementation. > > > > >>> Users will immediately notice a radical plummet in working thread > > > > count on > > > > >>> the client side. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> For the cleanup of old idioms alone, in test code in particular, > > the > > > > patch > > > > >>> is worth merging. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Any perf numbers to share comparing old sync and async? > > > > >>> > > > > >>> What about difference in operation? Is there any commentary or > doc > > or > > > > >>> release note to point at? > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Thanks, > > > > >>> S > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 6:59 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) < > > palomino...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > >>> wrote: > > > > >>> > > > > >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-21512 > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> "Reimplement sync client based on async client" > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> The jira title tells everything. This is what I promised when I > > > first > > > > >>>> introduced the async client in HBase, about three years ago, > that > > > the > > > > >>> sync > > > > >>>> client can be implemented on top of the async client, so we can > > > remove > > > > >>> the > > > > >>>> old sync client implementation, which can reduce our client code > > > base > > > > a > > > > >>>> lot. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> I've already opened a PR here, and received several > > feedback(thanks > > > > >>> stack!) > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/287 > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> It shows that we add 8,663 lines and remove 31,386 lines. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> This is the flaky dashboard for this branch > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > > https://builds.apache.org/job/HBASE-Find-Flaky-Tests/job/HBASE-21512/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/dashboard.html > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> With the recent efforts I think it is getting better. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Will fill the release note soon, it will be a fat one. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Please vote > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> [] +1 > > > > >>>> [] +0/-0 > > > > >>>> [] -1 Do not merge the branch back because ... > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> Thanks. Any suggestions are welcomed. > > > > >>>> > > > > >>> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
