[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-4683?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13152402#comment-13152402
]
Jean-Daniel Cryans commented on HBASE-4683:
-------------------------------------------
bq. Is useful for anybody?
I'm sure it would be.
bq. Should this maybe be set per CF?
Good question, I can't tell really without a use case although. IIUC, currently
with HFile v2 setting block cache to false doesn't even cache index blocks? If
so, my opinion would be that we should always cache index blocks and don't even
bother having a config for that. I'm curious as if there's ever a situation
where you wouldn't want to cache index blocks since they are so small.
> Create config option to only cache index blocks
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-4683
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-4683
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Reporter: Lars Hofhansl
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 0.94.0
>
> Attachments: 4683-v2.txt, 4683.txt
>
>
> This would add a new boolean config option: hfile.block.cache.datablocks
> Default would be true.
> Setting this to false allows HBase in a mode where only index blocks are
> cached, which is useful for analytical scenarios where a useful working set
> of the data cannot be expected to fit into the (aggregate) cache.
> This is the equivalent of setting cacheBlocks to false on all scans
> (including scans on behalf of gets).
> I would like to get a general feeling about what folks think about this.
> The change itself would be simple.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
