[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SENTRY-2305?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16645569#comment-16645569
]
Hadoop QA commented on SENTRY-2305:
-----------------------------------
Here are the results of testing the latest attachment
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12943288/SENTRY-2305.003.patch
against master.
{color:green}Overall:{color} +1 all checks pass
{color:green}SUCCESS:{color} all tests passed
Console output:
https://builds.apache.org/job/PreCommit-SENTRY-Build/4175/console
This message is automatically generated.
> Optimize time taken for persistence HMS snapshot by persisting in parallel
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: SENTRY-2305
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SENTRY-2305
> Project: Sentry
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: Sentry
> Affects Versions: 2.1.0
> Reporter: kalyan kumar kalvagadda
> Assignee: kalyan kumar kalvagadda
> Priority: Major
> Attachments: SENTRY-2305.001.patch, SENTRY-2305.002.patch,
> SENTRY-2305.003.patch
>
>
> There are couple of options
> # Break the total snapshot into to batches and persist all of them in
> parallel in different transactions. As sentry uses repeatable_read isolation
> level we should be able to have parallel writes on the same table. This bring
> an issue if there is a failure in persisting any of the batches. This
> approach needs additional logic of cleaning the partially persisted snapshot.
> I’m evaluating this option.
> ** *Result:* Initial results are promising. Time to persist the snapshot came
> down by 60%.
> # Try disabling L1 Cache for persisting the snapshot.
> # Try persisting the snapshot entries sequentially in separate transactions.
> As transactions which commit huge data might take longer as they take a lot
> of CPU cycles to keep the rollback log up to date.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v7.6.3#76005)
