Thanks. I didn't realize this. I have created an issue and attached the
performance plots to the issue:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-931
On Jan 3, 2013, at 8:26 PM, Drew Farris wrote:
Yep, most apache lists strip attachments.
On Thursday, January 3, 2013, Kepner, Jeremy - 05
Yep, most apache lists strip attachments.
On Thursday, January 3, 2013, Kepner, Jeremy - 0553 - MITLL wrote:
> Here it is again. It got sent the last time. Does the e-mail list strip
> out attachments?
>
> On Jan 3, 2013, at 7:47 PM, Josh Elser wrote:
>
> > I think you missed your attachment :)
Actually, I'm apparently blind. Just kidding, didn't receive. Perhaps
over a certain size? I've seen some before. You could open something on
Jira and attach it there.
On 01/03/2013 08:10 PM, Josh Elser wrote:
I don't think it should/does. I got it this time.
On 01/03/2013 07:55 PM, Kepner, J
I think so, because I got it on the first Terry when I was directly listed
Sent from my phone, please pardon the typos and brevity.
On Jan 3, 2013 8:06 PM, "Kepner, Jeremy - 0553 - MITLL"
wrote:
> Here it is again. It got sent the last time. Does the e-mail list strip
> out attachments?
>
> On
I don't think it should/does. I got it this time.
On 01/03/2013 07:55 PM, Kepner, Jeremy - 0553 - MITLL wrote:
Here it is again. It got sent the last time. Does the e-mail list strip out
attachments?
Here it is again. It got sent the last time. Does the e-mail list strip out
attachments?
On Jan 3, 2013, at 7:47 PM, Josh Elser wrote:
> I think you missed your attachment :)
>
> On 01/03/2013 07:31 PM, Kepner, Jeremy - 0553 - MITLL wrote:
>> Attached is the log for a set for 3 ingests. The f
I think you missed your attachment :)
On 01/03/2013 07:31 PM, Kepner, Jeremy - 0553 - MITLL wrote:
Attached is the log for a set for 3 ingests. The first hump is with 1
ingestor, the second hump is with 2 ingestors, and the third hump is with 3
ingestors. The 3 ingestor case starts oscillati
Attached is the log for a set for 3 ingests. The first hump is with 1
ingestor, the second hump is with 2 ingestors, and the third hump is with 3
ingestors. The 3 ingestor case starts oscillating about 21:40. I don't see any
spikes in any of the fields. It would be nice if there was also a pl
How many hard drives and what's your max minor/maor compactions set to?
These can severely limit your performance due to potential disk thrashing.
If you observe the monitor, when ingest starts trailing, do you see it
undergoing, or possibly being backed up on, any form of compaction? And
lastly, a
No correlation with compactions. No queries.
On Thu, Jan 03, 2013 at 11:24:17AM -0500, William Slacum wrote:
> Have you also been tracking compactions? Did you have a query load?
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 7:25 PM, Kepner, Jeremy - 0553 - MITLL <
> kep...@ll.mit.edu> wrote:
>
> > Hmmm, that'
You may be seeing some impact due to ACCUMULO-893:
http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-893
Are you seeing 2-minute hold times popping up?
-Eric
On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 7:25 PM, Kepner, Jeremy - 0553 - MITLL <
kep...@ll.mit.edu> wrote:
> Hmmm, that's interesting, because in the past I
Have you also been tracking compactions? Did you have a query load?
On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 7:25 PM, Kepner, Jeremy - 0553 - MITLL <
kep...@ll.mit.edu> wrote:
> Hmmm, that's interesting, because in the past I didn't see this behavior.
> It might be worth having someone look into because it seems
Hmmm, that's interesting, because in the past I didn't see this behavior. It
might be worth having someone look into because it seems to have a 2x impact on
sustained ingest.
Regards. -Jeremy
On Jan 2, 2013, at 2:23 PM, Keith Turner wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 2:11 PM, Jeremy Kepner wr
So what mechanism causes the number of Xceivers to increase?
I am carefully controlling the number of ingestors and the data isn't varying
too much.
I would expect the number of Xceivers to remain consant.
Regards. -Jeremy
On Tue, Jan 01, 2013 at 09:45:20PM -0500, Eric Newton wrote:
> Hey Jerem
How many disks do you have? That can be bottle-necking throughput as the
number of Xceivers is related to the number of resources (threads, sockets:
http://blog.cloudera.com/blog/2012/03/hbase-hadoop-xceivers/) used at once
to perform operations.
On Tue, Jan 1, 2013 at 6:45 PM, Eric Newton wrote:
Hey Jeremy,
Can you compare the ingest rate to the number of tablets, too?
I've found, that if I have 20-80 tablets per server (on similar hardware) I
get the best performance.
# of Xceivers == number of writers when ingest is the primary target.
Also, is this 1.4 or trunk?
-Eric
On Tue, Ja
Accumulo Colleagues,
I am trying to optimize my ingest into a single node Accumulo instance
running on a 32 core node with 96 GB of RAM. I am seeing the follow ingest
variations as a I change the number of ingest processes (see attached):
-
Ingestors, Inges
17 matches
Mail list logo
