Hello Stack,
> > And throughput without WAL is about 50 Mb/sec and about 15 Mb/sec with > WAL > > on. When I run clients in serial order (i.e. at the moment there is only > > one > > working script) time almost stable and not grows. > > > > > > > See what the > > > numbers are like uploading into a table that is pre-split? > > > > > > Sorry, what you mean pre-split? You mean splitting regions before running > > script? > > > > > I was thinking you were uploading into a new table and that the region > splits were happening inline with your upload. I was asking what the > performance was like if the table had already had all its regions pre-made > wondering if it ran faster but sounds like your table is already pre-split. > > So where are we at now? You tried running multiple separate upload > processes and it still runs too slow? > Yes, still too slow, especially with WAL on. Btw, I see the greater row size, the greater impact has WAL. I'm not an expert in hbase internals, but I begin think that the reason of throughput fall in case of 25Kb size connected with flushing. I mean looks like we begin flush too often and it impacts on throughput. Also as I see from architecture description there are could be several reasons, like rolling hlog too often and long compaction period. Would you advice which log messages in region/master logs should warn me that something going wrong? -- Regards, Lyfar Dmitriy
