[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10531?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13930100#comment-13930100 ]
ramkrishna.s.vasudevan commented on HBASE-10531: ------------------------------------------------ So with the same environment, with same setup and random reads with 5 clients the difference between no copy and the exisiting way was about ~0.2 to 0.5 % degradation. But that is not very scientific. > Revisit how the key byte[] is passed to HFileScanner.seekTo and reseekTo > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Key: HBASE-10531 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10531 > Project: HBase > Issue Type: Sub-task > Reporter: ramkrishna.s.vasudevan > Assignee: ramkrishna.s.vasudevan > Fix For: 0.99.0 > > Attachments: HBASE-10531.patch, HBASE-10531_1.patch, > HBASE-10531_2.patch > > > Currently the byte[] key passed to HFileScanner.seekTo and > HFileScanner.reseekTo, is a combination of row, cf, qual, type and ts. And > the caller forms this by using kv.getBuffer, which is actually deprecated. > So see how this can be achieved considering kv.getBuffer is removed. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.2#6252)