Mridul,

What do you mean about "Counter's are not synchronized in 'real-time' " ?
As I know, JT will aggregate Counters from TT, so I think the aggregated
Counter in JT should be correct.


On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 3:08 PM, Mridul Muralidharan
<[email protected]>wrote:

> Jeff Zhang wrote:
>
>> *See my comments below*
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 3:22 PM, Something Something <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>  If I set # of reduce tasks to 1 using setNumReduceTasks(1), would the
>>> class
>>> be instantiated only on one machine.. always?  I mean if I have a cluster
>>> of
>>> say 1 master, 10 workers & 3 zookeepers, is the Reducer class guaranteed
>>> to
>>> be instantiated only on 1 machine?
>>>
>>> *--Yes*
>>>
>>
>>
>>  If answer is yes, then I will use static variable as a counter to see how
>>> may rows have been added to my HBase table so far.  In my use case, I
>>> want
>>> to write only N number of rows to a table.  Is there a better way to do
>>> this?  Please let me know.  Thanks.
>>>
>>>
>> *--Maybe you can use Counter to track the number of rows you add to HBase,
>> then you do not need to limit the reduce task as 1*
>>
>>
>>
> Counter's are not synchronized in 'real-time' : so you cant use that to
> limit at addition time imo.
> It is more for aggregation, not realtime messaging.
>
> - Mridul
>



-- 
Best Regards

Jeff Zhang

Reply via email to