2:46 PM, Michael Segel <
> > michael_se...@hotmail.com
> > > >wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Ok,
> > > > Silly question... why are you manually splitting your regions?
> > > >
> > > > I mean what do you h
at 2:46 PM, Michael Segel <
> michael_se...@hotmail.com
> > >wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Ok,
> > > Silly question... why are you manually splitting your regions?
> > >
> > > I mean what do you hope to gain?
> > >
> > > -
2:46 PM, Michael Segel >wrote:
>
> >
> > Ok,
> > Silly question... why are you manually splitting your regions?
> >
> > I mean what do you hope to gain?
> >
> > -Mike
> >
> >
> > > Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 13:37:10 -0800
> > >
provement).
--Suraj
On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Michael Segel wrote:
>
> Ok,
> Silly question... why are you manually splitting your regions?
>
> I mean what do you hope to gain?
>
> -Mike
>
>
> > Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 13:37:10 -0800
> > Subject: Re: Conf
Ok,
Silly question... why are you manually splitting your regions?
I mean what do you hope to gain?
-Mike
> Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 13:37:10 -0800
> Subject: Re: Confusing Region Split behavior in YCSB Tests
> From: svarma...@gmail.com
> To: user@hbase.apache.org
>
> Ok -
Ok - so, I ran another series of tests on the region split behavior against
our 0.20.6 cluster. This time, as suggested, I ran the split table followed
by a flush table and finally a major_compact table before each of the region
splits. I split the original region to 2, 4, 8, 16 and 32 regions via
Hmm - no, I didn't do a major compact after the splits.
The data size was fairly small - and I expected it to be loaded into block
cache (size set to 0.6) ...
Let me run a re-test by doing major compact as well to see how it behaves.
Thanks for the idea.
--Suraj
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 3:24 PM,
One thought:
When you do splits, do you also major compact after the splits before
starting the read test? Maybe it's possible that when you just have one
region it's all local data, but as you split it, it's non-local. With the
small data sizes, it all fits in cache so it doesn't matter, but with
1) 100% random reads. Sorry - I should have mentioned that.
2) Hmm ... I was using 0.1.2; I had to fix the hbase db client to work with
hbase-0.20.6 ..., so I had taken a git pull on Oct 18th. I see that as of
Oct 26th, the README file has been updated with the 0.1.3 update (with the
0.20.6 fixes a
Weird results indeed, nothing comes to mind at the moment that could
explain this behavior. I do have a few questions/comments:
- It's not clear to me from your email what kind of operation your
were doing. Was it 100% random reads? Or a mix of reads and writes?
Any scans?
- Which version of YCS
Hello All:
I'm using YCSB to execute tests on the effects of region splits and I'm
seeing some confusing results.
The aim of the experiment was to determine how much of an impact on
throughput/average latency/95th-percentile latency is observed when for the
same load the regions are split and dist
11 matches
Mail list logo
