Stack I agree that the connection establishment is indeed expensive but
shouldn't that be the reason why we should only have connection
establishment in the synchronized block and not the retrieval of the
connection object which is already established ?
Wat I mean is that, if HBASE_INSTANCES.get(
I'd imagine the Connection creation expensive, too expensive for the
putIfAbsent idiom. What you think Akash?
St.Ack
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 4:55 AM, Akash Ashok wrote:
> I was just curious as to whether this was a hotspot or not. I mean as Ryan
> said if its not a part of high perf code path th
I was just curious as to whether this was a hotspot or not. I mean as Ryan
said if its not a part of high perf code path then its ok.
Also now I'm wondering why can't we do a putIfAbsent? More like
HConnectionKey connectionKey = new HConnectionKey(conf);
HConnectionImplementation connecti
How would double-checked -- a problematic pattern at the best of times
in java (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-checked_locking) --
help here? What you thinking? We can't really do putIfAbsent w/ a
connection instance?
Good on you Akash,
St.Ack
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Akash As
Not really part of the high perf code path, I'd be interested in seeing
profiling that indicates otherwise.
On Aug 23, 2011 11:46 AM, "Akash Ashok" wrote:
> Hi,
> I have pasted the code below for HConnectionManager.getConnection
>
> public static HConnection getConnection(Configuration conf)
> thr
Hi,
I have pasted the code below for HConnectionManager.getConnection
public static HConnection getConnection(Configuration conf)
throws ZooKeeperConnectionException {
HConnectionKey connectionKey = new HConnectionKey(conf);
synchronized (HBASE_INSTANCES) {
HConnectionImplem
