RE: 答复: HBase random read performance
So what is lacking here? The action should also been parallel inside RS for
each region, Instead of just parallel on RS level?
Seems this will be rather difficult to implement, and for Get, might not be
worthy?
I looked
at src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/client/HConnectionManager.java
in
0.94
In processBatchCallback(), starting line 1538,
// step 1: break up into regionserver-sized chunks and build the data
structs
MapHRegionLocation, MultiActionR actionsByServer =
new HashMapHRegionLocation, MultiActionR();
for (int i = 0; i workingList.size(); i++) {
So we do group individual action by server.
FYI
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 6:30 AM, Ted Yu yuzhih...@gmail.com wrote:
Doug made a good point.
Take a look at the performance gain for parallel scan (bottom chart
compared to top chart):
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12578083/FDencode.png
See
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8316?focusedCommentId=1362
8300page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpan
el#comment-13628300for explanation of the two methods.
Cheers
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 6:21 AM, Doug Meil
doug.m...@explorysmedical.comwrote:
Hi there, regarding this...
We are passing random 1 row-keys as input, while HBase is
taking
around
17 secs to return 1 records.
…. Given that you are generating 10,000 random keys, your multi-get
is very likely hitting all 5 nodes of your cluster.
Historically, multi-Get used to first sort the requests by RS and
then
*serially* go the RS to process the multi-Get. I'm not sure of the
current (0.94.x) behavior if it multi-threads or not.
One thing you might want to consider is confirming that client
behavior, and if it's not multi-threading then perform a test that
does the same RS sorting via...
http://hbase.apache.org/apidocs/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/client/HTable
.html#
getRegionLocation%28byte[http://hbase.apache.org/apidocs/org/apache/
hadoop/hbase/client/HTable.html#getRegionLocation%28byte[
]%29
…. and then spin up your own threads (one per target RS) and see what
happens.
On 4/15/13 9:04 AM, Ankit Jain ankitjainc...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Liang,
Thanks Liang for reply..
Ans1:
I tried by using HFile block size of 32 KB and bloom filter is enabled.
The
random read performance is 1 records in 23 secs.
Ans2:
We are retrieving all the 1 rows in one call.
Ans3:
Disk detai:
Model Number: ST2000DM001-1CH164
Serial Number: Z1E276YF
Please suggest some more optimization
Thanks,
Ankit Jain
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 5:11 PM, 谢良 xieli...@xiaomi.com wrote:
First, it's probably helpless to set block size to 4KB, please
refer to the beginning of HFile.java:
Smaller blocks are good
* for random access, but require more memory to hold the block
index, and may
* be slower to create (because we must flush the compressor
stream at the
* conclusion of each data block, which leads to an FS I/O flush).
Further, due
* to the internal caching in Compression codec, the smallest
possible block
* size would be around 20KB-30KB.
Second, is it a single-thread test client or multi-threads? we
couldn't expect too much if the requests are one by one.
Third, could you provide more info about your DN disk numbers and
IO utils ?
Thanks,
Liang
发件人: Ankit Jain [ankitjainc...@gmail.com]
发送时间: 2013年4月15日 18:53
收件人: user@hbase.apache.org
主题: Re: HBase random read performance
Hi Anoop,
Thanks for reply..
I tried by setting Hfile block size 4KB and also enabled the bloom
filter(ROW). The maximum read performance that I was able to
achieve is
1 records in 14 secs (size of record is 1.6KB).
Please suggest some tuning..
Thanks,
Ankit Jain
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Rishabh Agrawal
rishabh.agra...@impetus.co.in wrote:
Interesting. Can you explain why this happens?
-Original Message-
From: Anoop Sam John [mailto:anoo...@huawei.com]
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 3:47 PM
To: user@hbase.apache.org
Subject: RE: HBase random read performance
Ankit
I guess you might be having default HFile block
size which is 64KB.
For random gets a lower value will be better. Try will some
thing
like
8KB
and check the latency?
Ya ofcourse blooms can help (if major compaction was not done at
the
time
of testing)
-Anoop-
From: Ankit Jain [ankitjainc...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 13, 2013 11:01 AM
To: user@hbase.apache.org
Subject: HBase random read performance
Hi All,
We are using HBase 0.94.5 and Hadoop
Re: 答复: HBase random read performance
I think there is something in the middle that could be done. It was
discussed here a while ago, but without any JIRA created. See thread:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hbase-user/201302.mbox/%3CCAKxWWm19OC+dePTK60bMmcecv=7tc+3t4-bq6fdqeppix_e...@mail.gmail.com%3E
If someone can spend some time on it, I can create the JIRA...
Nicolas
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Liu, Raymond raymond@intel.com wrote:
So what is lacking here? The action should also been parallel inside RS
for each region, Instead of just parallel on RS level?
Seems this will be rather difficult to implement, and for Get, might not
be worthy?
I looked
at src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/client/HConnectionManager.java
in
0.94
In processBatchCallback(), starting line 1538,
// step 1: break up into regionserver-sized chunks and build the
data
structs
MapHRegionLocation, MultiActionR actionsByServer =
new HashMapHRegionLocation, MultiActionR();
for (int i = 0; i workingList.size(); i++) {
So we do group individual action by server.
FYI
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 6:30 AM, Ted Yu yuzhih...@gmail.com wrote:
Doug made a good point.
Take a look at the performance gain for parallel scan (bottom chart
compared to top chart):
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12578083/FDencode.png
See
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8316?focusedCommentId=1362
8300page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpan
el#comment-13628300for explanation of the two methods.
Cheers
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 6:21 AM, Doug Meil
doug.m...@explorysmedical.comwrote:
Hi there, regarding this...
We are passing random 1 row-keys as input, while HBase is
taking
around
17 secs to return 1 records.
…. Given that you are generating 10,000 random keys, your multi-get
is very likely hitting all 5 nodes of your cluster.
Historically, multi-Get used to first sort the requests by RS and
then
*serially* go the RS to process the multi-Get. I'm not sure of the
current (0.94.x) behavior if it multi-threads or not.
One thing you might want to consider is confirming that client
behavior, and if it's not multi-threading then perform a test that
does the same RS sorting via...
http://hbase.apache.org/apidocs/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/client/HTable
.html#
getRegionLocation%28byte[http://hbase.apache.org/apidocs/org/apache/
hadoop/hbase/client/HTable.html#getRegionLocation%28byte[
]%29
…. and then spin up your own threads (one per target RS) and see what
happens.
On 4/15/13 9:04 AM, Ankit Jain ankitjainc...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Liang,
Thanks Liang for reply..
Ans1:
I tried by using HFile block size of 32 KB and bloom filter is
enabled.
The
random read performance is 1 records in 23 secs.
Ans2:
We are retrieving all the 1 rows in one call.
Ans3:
Disk detai:
Model Number: ST2000DM001-1CH164
Serial Number: Z1E276YF
Please suggest some more optimization
Thanks,
Ankit Jain
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 5:11 PM, 谢良 xieli...@xiaomi.com wrote:
First, it's probably helpless to set block size to 4KB, please
refer to the beginning of HFile.java:
Smaller blocks are good
* for random access, but require more memory to hold the block
index, and may
* be slower to create (because we must flush the compressor
stream at the
* conclusion of each data block, which leads to an FS I/O flush).
Further, due
* to the internal caching in Compression codec, the smallest
possible block
* size would be around 20KB-30KB.
Second, is it a single-thread test client or multi-threads? we
couldn't expect too much if the requests are one by one.
Third, could you provide more info about your DN disk numbers and
IO utils ?
Thanks,
Liang
发件人: Ankit Jain [ankitjainc...@gmail.com]
发送时间: 2013年4月15日 18:53
收件人: user@hbase.apache.org
主题: Re: HBase random read performance
Hi Anoop,
Thanks for reply..
I tried by setting Hfile block size 4KB and also enabled the bloom
filter(ROW). The maximum read performance that I was able to
achieve is
1 records in 14 secs (size of record is 1.6KB).
Please suggest some tuning..
Thanks,
Ankit Jain
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Rishabh Agrawal
rishabh.agra...@impetus.co.in wrote:
Interesting. Can you explain why this happens?
-Original Message-
From: Anoop Sam John [mailto:anoo...@huawei.com]
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 3:47 PM
To: user@hbase.apache.org
Subject: RE: HBase random read performance
Ankit
I
Re: 答复: HBase random read performance
Hi Nicolas,
I think it might be good to create a JIRA for that anyway since seems that
some users are expecting this behaviour.
My 2¢ ;)
JM
2013/4/16 Nicolas Liochon nkey...@gmail.com
I think there is something in the middle that could be done. It was
discussed here a while ago, but without any JIRA created. See thread:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hbase-user/201302.mbox/%3CCAKxWWm19OC+dePTK60bMmcecv=7tc+3t4-bq6fdqeppix_e...@mail.gmail.com%3E
If someone can spend some time on it, I can create the JIRA...
Nicolas
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Liu, Raymond raymond@intel.com
wrote:
So what is lacking here? The action should also been parallel inside RS
for each region, Instead of just parallel on RS level?
Seems this will be rather difficult to implement, and for Get, might not
be worthy?
I looked
at src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/client/HConnectionManager.java
in
0.94
In processBatchCallback(), starting line 1538,
// step 1: break up into regionserver-sized chunks and build
the
data
structs
MapHRegionLocation, MultiActionR actionsByServer =
new HashMapHRegionLocation, MultiActionR();
for (int i = 0; i workingList.size(); i++) {
So we do group individual action by server.
FYI
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 6:30 AM, Ted Yu yuzhih...@gmail.com wrote:
Doug made a good point.
Take a look at the performance gain for parallel scan (bottom chart
compared to top chart):
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12578083/FDencode.png
See
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8316?focusedCommentId=1362
8300page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpan
el#comment-13628300for explanation of the two methods.
Cheers
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 6:21 AM, Doug Meil
doug.m...@explorysmedical.comwrote:
Hi there, regarding this...
We are passing random 1 row-keys as input, while HBase is
taking
around
17 secs to return 1 records.
…. Given that you are generating 10,000 random keys, your multi-get
is very likely hitting all 5 nodes of your cluster.
Historically, multi-Get used to first sort the requests by RS and
then
*serially* go the RS to process the multi-Get. I'm not sure of the
current (0.94.x) behavior if it multi-threads or not.
One thing you might want to consider is confirming that client
behavior, and if it's not multi-threading then perform a test that
does the same RS sorting via...
http://hbase.apache.org/apidocs/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/client/HTable
.html#
getRegionLocation%28byte[
http://hbase.apache.org/apidocs/org/apache/
hadoop/hbase/client/HTable.html#getRegionLocation%28byte[
]%29
…. and then spin up your own threads (one per target RS) and see
what
happens.
On 4/15/13 9:04 AM, Ankit Jain ankitjainc...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Liang,
Thanks Liang for reply..
Ans1:
I tried by using HFile block size of 32 KB and bloom filter is
enabled.
The
random read performance is 1 records in 23 secs.
Ans2:
We are retrieving all the 1 rows in one call.
Ans3:
Disk detai:
Model Number: ST2000DM001-1CH164
Serial Number: Z1E276YF
Please suggest some more optimization
Thanks,
Ankit Jain
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 5:11 PM, 谢良 xieli...@xiaomi.com wrote:
First, it's probably helpless to set block size to 4KB, please
refer to the beginning of HFile.java:
Smaller blocks are good
* for random access, but require more memory to hold the block
index, and may
* be slower to create (because we must flush the compressor
stream at the
* conclusion of each data block, which leads to an FS I/O
flush).
Further, due
* to the internal caching in Compression codec, the smallest
possible block
* size would be around 20KB-30KB.
Second, is it a single-thread test client or multi-threads? we
couldn't expect too much if the requests are one by one.
Third, could you provide more info about your DN disk numbers
and
IO utils ?
Thanks,
Liang
发件人: Ankit Jain [ankitjainc...@gmail.com]
发送时间: 2013年4月15日 18:53
收件人: user@hbase.apache.org
主题: Re: HBase random read performance
Hi Anoop,
Thanks for reply..
I tried by setting Hfile block size 4KB and also enabled the
bloom
filter(ROW). The maximum read performance that I was able to
achieve is
1 records in 14 secs (size of record is 1.6KB).
Please suggest some tuning..
Thanks,
Ankit Jain
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Rishabh
Re: 答复: HBase random read performance
This fundamentally different, though. A scanner by default scans all regions
serially, because it promises to return all rows in sort order.
A multi get is already parallelized across regions (and hence accross region
servers).
Before we do a lot of work here we should fist make sure that nothing else is
wrong with OPs setup.
17s for 1 is not right.
Ankit, what does the IO look like across the machines in the cluster while this
is happening?
Since you pick 1 rows at random your expectation is that entire set of rows
will fit into the block cache? Is that the case?
-- Lars
From: Ted Yu yuzhih...@gmail.com
To: user@hbase.apache.org
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 10:03 AM
Subject: Re: 答复: HBase random read performance
This is a related JIRA which should provide noticeable speed up:
HBASE-1935 Scan in parallel
Cheers
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 7:13 AM, Ted Yu yuzhih...@gmail.com wrote:
I looked
at src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/client/HConnectionManager.java in
0.94
In processBatchCallback(), starting line 1538,
// step 1: break up into regionserver-sized chunks and build the
data structs
MapHRegionLocation, MultiActionR actionsByServer =
new HashMapHRegionLocation, MultiActionR();
for (int i = 0; i workingList.size(); i++) {
So we do group individual action by server.
FYI
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 6:30 AM, Ted Yu yuzhih...@gmail.com wrote:
Doug made a good point.
Take a look at the performance gain for parallel scan (bottom chart
compared to top chart):
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12578083/FDencode.png
See
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8316?focusedCommentId=13628300page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13628300for
explanation of the two methods.
Cheers
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 6:21 AM, Doug Meil doug.m...@explorysmedical.com
wrote:
Hi there, regarding this...
We are passing random 1 row-keys as input, while HBase is taking
around
17 secs to return 1 records.
…. Given that you are generating 10,000 random keys, your multi-get is
very likely hitting all 5 nodes of your cluster.
Historically, multi-Get used to first sort the requests by RS and then
*serially* go the RS to process the multi-Get. I'm not sure of the
current (0.94.x) behavior if it multi-threads or not.
One thing you might want to consider is confirming that client behavior,
and if it's not multi-threading then perform a test that does the same RS
sorting via...
http://hbase.apache.org/apidocs/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/client/HTable.html#
getRegionLocation%28byte[http://hbase.apache.org/apidocs/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/client/HTable.html#getRegionLocation%28byte[
]%29
…. and then spin up your own threads (one per target RS) and see what
happens.
On 4/15/13 9:04 AM, Ankit Jain ankitjainc...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Liang,
Thanks Liang for reply..
Ans1:
I tried by using HFile block size of 32 KB and bloom filter is enabled.
The
random read performance is 1 records in 23 secs.
Ans2:
We are retrieving all the 1 rows in one call.
Ans3:
Disk detai:
Model Number: ST2000DM001-1CH164
Serial Number: Z1E276YF
Please suggest some more optimization
Thanks,
Ankit Jain
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 5:11 PM, 谢良 xieli...@xiaomi.com wrote:
First, it's probably helpless to set block size to 4KB, please refer
to
the beginning of HFile.java:
Smaller blocks are good
* for random access, but require more memory to hold the block index,
and
may
* be slower to create (because we must flush the compressor stream at
the
* conclusion of each data block, which leads to an FS I/O flush).
Further, due
* to the internal caching in Compression codec, the smallest possible
block
* size would be around 20KB-30KB.
Second, is it a single-thread test client or multi-threads? we
couldn't
expect too much if the requests are one by one.
Third, could you provide more info about your DN disk numbers and IO
utils ?
Thanks,
Liang
发件人: Ankit Jain [ankitjainc...@gmail.com]
发送时间: 2013年4月15日 18:53
收件人: user@hbase.apache.org
主题: Re: HBase random read performance
Hi Anoop,
Thanks for reply..
I tried by setting Hfile block size 4KB and also enabled the bloom
filter(ROW). The maximum read performance that I was able to achieve
is
1 records in 14 secs (size of record is 1.6KB).
Please suggest some tuning..
Thanks,
Ankit Jain
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Rishabh Agrawal
rishabh.agra...@impetus.co.in wrote:
Interesting. Can you explain why this happens?
-Original Message-
From: Anoop Sam John [mailto:anoo...@huawei.com]
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 3:47 PM
To: user@hbase.apache.org
Subject: RE: HBase random read performance
Ankit
Re: 答复: HBase random read performance
Hi Liang, Thanks Liang for reply.. Ans1: I tried by using HFile block size of 32 KB and bloom filter is enabled. The random read performance is 1 records in 23 secs. Ans2: We are retrieving all the 1 rows in one call. Ans3: Disk detai: Model Number: ST2000DM001-1CH164 Serial Number: Z1E276YF Please suggest some more optimization Thanks, Ankit Jain On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 5:11 PM, 谢良 xieli...@xiaomi.com wrote: First, it's probably helpless to set block size to 4KB, please refer to the beginning of HFile.java: Smaller blocks are good * for random access, but require more memory to hold the block index, and may * be slower to create (because we must flush the compressor stream at the * conclusion of each data block, which leads to an FS I/O flush). Further, due * to the internal caching in Compression codec, the smallest possible block * size would be around 20KB-30KB. Second, is it a single-thread test client or multi-threads? we couldn't expect too much if the requests are one by one. Third, could you provide more info about your DN disk numbers and IO utils ? Thanks, Liang 发件人: Ankit Jain [ankitjainc...@gmail.com] 发送时间: 2013年4月15日 18:53 收件人: user@hbase.apache.org 主题: Re: HBase random read performance Hi Anoop, Thanks for reply.. I tried by setting Hfile block size 4KB and also enabled the bloom filter(ROW). The maximum read performance that I was able to achieve is 1 records in 14 secs (size of record is 1.6KB). Please suggest some tuning.. Thanks, Ankit Jain On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Rishabh Agrawal rishabh.agra...@impetus.co.in wrote: Interesting. Can you explain why this happens? -Original Message- From: Anoop Sam John [mailto:anoo...@huawei.com] Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 3:47 PM To: user@hbase.apache.org Subject: RE: HBase random read performance Ankit I guess you might be having default HFile block size which is 64KB. For random gets a lower value will be better. Try will some thing like 8KB and check the latency? Ya ofcourse blooms can help (if major compaction was not done at the time of testing) -Anoop- From: Ankit Jain [ankitjainc...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, April 13, 2013 11:01 AM To: user@hbase.apache.org Subject: HBase random read performance Hi All, We are using HBase 0.94.5 and Hadoop 1.0.4. We have HBase cluster of 5 nodes(5 regionservers and 1 master node). Each regionserver has 8 GB RAM. We have loaded 25 millions records in HBase table, regions are pre-split into 16 regions and all the regions are equally loaded. We are getting very low random read performance while performing multi get from HBase. We are passing random 1 row-keys as input, while HBase is taking around 17 secs to return 1 records. Please suggest some tuning to increase HBase read performance. Thanks, Ankit Jain iLabs -- Thanks, Ankit Jain NOTE: This message may contain information that is confidential, proprietary, privileged or otherwise protected by law. The message is intended solely for the named addressee. If received in error, please destroy and notify the sender. Any use of this email is prohibited when received in error. Impetus does not represent, warrant and/or guarantee, that the integrity of this communication has been maintained nor that the communication is free of errors, virus, interception or interference. -- Thanks, Ankit Jain -- Thanks, Ankit Jain
Re: 答复: HBase random read performance
Hi there, regarding this... We are passing random 1 row-keys as input, while HBase is taking around 17 secs to return 1 records. …. Given that you are generating 10,000 random keys, your multi-get is very likely hitting all 5 nodes of your cluster. Historically, multi-Get used to first sort the requests by RS and then *serially* go the RS to process the multi-Get. I'm not sure of the current (0.94.x) behavior if it multi-threads or not. One thing you might want to consider is confirming that client behavior, and if it's not multi-threading then perform a test that does the same RS sorting via... http://hbase.apache.org/apidocs/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/client/HTable.html# getRegionLocation%28byte[]%29 …. and then spin up your own threads (one per target RS) and see what happens. On 4/15/13 9:04 AM, Ankit Jain ankitjainc...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Liang, Thanks Liang for reply.. Ans1: I tried by using HFile block size of 32 KB and bloom filter is enabled. The random read performance is 1 records in 23 secs. Ans2: We are retrieving all the 1 rows in one call. Ans3: Disk detai: Model Number: ST2000DM001-1CH164 Serial Number: Z1E276YF Please suggest some more optimization Thanks, Ankit Jain On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 5:11 PM, 谢良 xieli...@xiaomi.com wrote: First, it's probably helpless to set block size to 4KB, please refer to the beginning of HFile.java: Smaller blocks are good * for random access, but require more memory to hold the block index, and may * be slower to create (because we must flush the compressor stream at the * conclusion of each data block, which leads to an FS I/O flush). Further, due * to the internal caching in Compression codec, the smallest possible block * size would be around 20KB-30KB. Second, is it a single-thread test client or multi-threads? we couldn't expect too much if the requests are one by one. Third, could you provide more info about your DN disk numbers and IO utils ? Thanks, Liang 发件人: Ankit Jain [ankitjainc...@gmail.com] 发送时间: 2013年4月15日 18:53 收件人: user@hbase.apache.org 主题: Re: HBase random read performance Hi Anoop, Thanks for reply.. I tried by setting Hfile block size 4KB and also enabled the bloom filter(ROW). The maximum read performance that I was able to achieve is 1 records in 14 secs (size of record is 1.6KB). Please suggest some tuning.. Thanks, Ankit Jain On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Rishabh Agrawal rishabh.agra...@impetus.co.in wrote: Interesting. Can you explain why this happens? -Original Message- From: Anoop Sam John [mailto:anoo...@huawei.com] Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 3:47 PM To: user@hbase.apache.org Subject: RE: HBase random read performance Ankit I guess you might be having default HFile block size which is 64KB. For random gets a lower value will be better. Try will some thing like 8KB and check the latency? Ya ofcourse blooms can help (if major compaction was not done at the time of testing) -Anoop- From: Ankit Jain [ankitjainc...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, April 13, 2013 11:01 AM To: user@hbase.apache.org Subject: HBase random read performance Hi All, We are using HBase 0.94.5 and Hadoop 1.0.4. We have HBase cluster of 5 nodes(5 regionservers and 1 master node). Each regionserver has 8 GB RAM. We have loaded 25 millions records in HBase table, regions are pre-split into 16 regions and all the regions are equally loaded. We are getting very low random read performance while performing multi get from HBase. We are passing random 1 row-keys as input, while HBase is taking around 17 secs to return 1 records. Please suggest some tuning to increase HBase read performance. Thanks, Ankit Jain iLabs -- Thanks, Ankit Jain NOTE: This message may contain information that is confidential, proprietary, privileged or otherwise protected by law. The message is intended solely for the named addressee. If received in error, please destroy and notify the sender. Any use of this email is prohibited when received in error. Impetus does not represent, warrant and/or guarantee, that the integrity of this communication has been maintained nor that the communication is free of errors, virus, interception or interference. -- Thanks, Ankit Jain -- Thanks, Ankit Jain
Re: 答复: HBase random read performance
Doug made a good point. Take a look at the performance gain for parallel scan (bottom chart compared to top chart): https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12578083/FDencode.png See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8316?focusedCommentId=13628300page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13628300for explanation of the two methods. Cheers On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 6:21 AM, Doug Meil doug.m...@explorysmedical.comwrote: Hi there, regarding this... We are passing random 1 row-keys as input, while HBase is taking around 17 secs to return 1 records. …. Given that you are generating 10,000 random keys, your multi-get is very likely hitting all 5 nodes of your cluster. Historically, multi-Get used to first sort the requests by RS and then *serially* go the RS to process the multi-Get. I'm not sure of the current (0.94.x) behavior if it multi-threads or not. One thing you might want to consider is confirming that client behavior, and if it's not multi-threading then perform a test that does the same RS sorting via... http://hbase.apache.org/apidocs/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/client/HTable.html# getRegionLocation%28byte[]%29 …. and then spin up your own threads (one per target RS) and see what happens. On 4/15/13 9:04 AM, Ankit Jain ankitjainc...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Liang, Thanks Liang for reply.. Ans1: I tried by using HFile block size of 32 KB and bloom filter is enabled. The random read performance is 1 records in 23 secs. Ans2: We are retrieving all the 1 rows in one call. Ans3: Disk detai: Model Number: ST2000DM001-1CH164 Serial Number: Z1E276YF Please suggest some more optimization Thanks, Ankit Jain On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 5:11 PM, 谢良 xieli...@xiaomi.com wrote: First, it's probably helpless to set block size to 4KB, please refer to the beginning of HFile.java: Smaller blocks are good * for random access, but require more memory to hold the block index, and may * be slower to create (because we must flush the compressor stream at the * conclusion of each data block, which leads to an FS I/O flush). Further, due * to the internal caching in Compression codec, the smallest possible block * size would be around 20KB-30KB. Second, is it a single-thread test client or multi-threads? we couldn't expect too much if the requests are one by one. Third, could you provide more info about your DN disk numbers and IO utils ? Thanks, Liang 发件人: Ankit Jain [ankitjainc...@gmail.com] 发送时间: 2013年4月15日 18:53 收件人: user@hbase.apache.org 主题: Re: HBase random read performance Hi Anoop, Thanks for reply.. I tried by setting Hfile block size 4KB and also enabled the bloom filter(ROW). The maximum read performance that I was able to achieve is 1 records in 14 secs (size of record is 1.6KB). Please suggest some tuning.. Thanks, Ankit Jain On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Rishabh Agrawal rishabh.agra...@impetus.co.in wrote: Interesting. Can you explain why this happens? -Original Message- From: Anoop Sam John [mailto:anoo...@huawei.com] Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 3:47 PM To: user@hbase.apache.org Subject: RE: HBase random read performance Ankit I guess you might be having default HFile block size which is 64KB. For random gets a lower value will be better. Try will some thing like 8KB and check the latency? Ya ofcourse blooms can help (if major compaction was not done at the time of testing) -Anoop- From: Ankit Jain [ankitjainc...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, April 13, 2013 11:01 AM To: user@hbase.apache.org Subject: HBase random read performance Hi All, We are using HBase 0.94.5 and Hadoop 1.0.4. We have HBase cluster of 5 nodes(5 regionservers and 1 master node). Each regionserver has 8 GB RAM. We have loaded 25 millions records in HBase table, regions are pre-split into 16 regions and all the regions are equally loaded. We are getting very low random read performance while performing multi get from HBase. We are passing random 1 row-keys as input, while HBase is taking around 17 secs to return 1 records. Please suggest some tuning to increase HBase read performance. Thanks, Ankit Jain iLabs -- Thanks, Ankit Jain NOTE: This message may contain information that is confidential, proprietary, privileged or otherwise protected by law. The message is intended solely for the named addressee. If received in error, please destroy and notify the sender. Any use of this email is prohibited when received in error. Impetus does not represent, warrant and/or
Re: 答复: HBase random read performance
I looked
at src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/client/HConnectionManager.java in
0.94
In processBatchCallback(), starting line 1538,
// step 1: break up into regionserver-sized chunks and build the
data structs
MapHRegionLocation, MultiActionR actionsByServer =
new HashMapHRegionLocation, MultiActionR();
for (int i = 0; i workingList.size(); i++) {
So we do group individual action by server.
FYI
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 6:30 AM, Ted Yu yuzhih...@gmail.com wrote:
Doug made a good point.
Take a look at the performance gain for parallel scan (bottom chart
compared to top chart):
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12578083/FDencode.png
See
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8316?focusedCommentId=13628300page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13628300for
explanation of the two methods.
Cheers
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 6:21 AM, Doug Meil
doug.m...@explorysmedical.comwrote:
Hi there, regarding this...
We are passing random 1 row-keys as input, while HBase is taking
around
17 secs to return 1 records.
…. Given that you are generating 10,000 random keys, your multi-get is
very likely hitting all 5 nodes of your cluster.
Historically, multi-Get used to first sort the requests by RS and then
*serially* go the RS to process the multi-Get. I'm not sure of the
current (0.94.x) behavior if it multi-threads or not.
One thing you might want to consider is confirming that client behavior,
and if it's not multi-threading then perform a test that does the same RS
sorting via...
http://hbase.apache.org/apidocs/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/client/HTable.html#
getRegionLocation%28byte[http://hbase.apache.org/apidocs/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/client/HTable.html#getRegionLocation%28byte[
]%29
…. and then spin up your own threads (one per target RS) and see what
happens.
On 4/15/13 9:04 AM, Ankit Jain ankitjainc...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Liang,
Thanks Liang for reply..
Ans1:
I tried by using HFile block size of 32 KB and bloom filter is enabled.
The
random read performance is 1 records in 23 secs.
Ans2:
We are retrieving all the 1 rows in one call.
Ans3:
Disk detai:
Model Number: ST2000DM001-1CH164
Serial Number: Z1E276YF
Please suggest some more optimization
Thanks,
Ankit Jain
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 5:11 PM, 谢良 xieli...@xiaomi.com wrote:
First, it's probably helpless to set block size to 4KB, please refer to
the beginning of HFile.java:
Smaller blocks are good
* for random access, but require more memory to hold the block index,
and
may
* be slower to create (because we must flush the compressor stream at
the
* conclusion of each data block, which leads to an FS I/O flush).
Further, due
* to the internal caching in Compression codec, the smallest possible
block
* size would be around 20KB-30KB.
Second, is it a single-thread test client or multi-threads? we couldn't
expect too much if the requests are one by one.
Third, could you provide more info about your DN disk numbers and IO
utils ?
Thanks,
Liang
发件人: Ankit Jain [ankitjainc...@gmail.com]
发送时间: 2013年4月15日 18:53
收件人: user@hbase.apache.org
主题: Re: HBase random read performance
Hi Anoop,
Thanks for reply..
I tried by setting Hfile block size 4KB and also enabled the bloom
filter(ROW). The maximum read performance that I was able to achieve is
1 records in 14 secs (size of record is 1.6KB).
Please suggest some tuning..
Thanks,
Ankit Jain
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Rishabh Agrawal
rishabh.agra...@impetus.co.in wrote:
Interesting. Can you explain why this happens?
-Original Message-
From: Anoop Sam John [mailto:anoo...@huawei.com]
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 3:47 PM
To: user@hbase.apache.org
Subject: RE: HBase random read performance
Ankit
I guess you might be having default HFile block size
which is 64KB.
For random gets a lower value will be better. Try will some thing
like
8KB
and check the latency?
Ya ofcourse blooms can help (if major compaction was not done at the
time
of testing)
-Anoop-
From: Ankit Jain [ankitjainc...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 13, 2013 11:01 AM
To: user@hbase.apache.org
Subject: HBase random read performance
Hi All,
We are using HBase 0.94.5 and Hadoop 1.0.4.
We have HBase cluster of 5 nodes(5 regionservers and 1 master node).
Each
regionserver has 8 GB RAM.
We have loaded 25 millions records in HBase table, regions are
pre-split
into 16 regions and all the regions are equally loaded.
We are getting very low random read performance while performing
multi
get
from HBase.
We are passing random 1 row-keys as
Re: 答复: HBase random read performance
This is a related JIRA which should provide noticeable speed up:
HBASE-1935 Scan in parallel
Cheers
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 7:13 AM, Ted Yu yuzhih...@gmail.com wrote:
I looked
at src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/client/HConnectionManager.java in
0.94
In processBatchCallback(), starting line 1538,
// step 1: break up into regionserver-sized chunks and build the
data structs
MapHRegionLocation, MultiActionR actionsByServer =
new HashMapHRegionLocation, MultiActionR();
for (int i = 0; i workingList.size(); i++) {
So we do group individual action by server.
FYI
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 6:30 AM, Ted Yu yuzhih...@gmail.com wrote:
Doug made a good point.
Take a look at the performance gain for parallel scan (bottom chart
compared to top chart):
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12578083/FDencode.png
See
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8316?focusedCommentId=13628300page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-13628300for
explanation of the two methods.
Cheers
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 6:21 AM, Doug Meil doug.m...@explorysmedical.com
wrote:
Hi there, regarding this...
We are passing random 1 row-keys as input, while HBase is taking
around
17 secs to return 1 records.
…. Given that you are generating 10,000 random keys, your multi-get is
very likely hitting all 5 nodes of your cluster.
Historically, multi-Get used to first sort the requests by RS and then
*serially* go the RS to process the multi-Get. I'm not sure of the
current (0.94.x) behavior if it multi-threads or not.
One thing you might want to consider is confirming that client behavior,
and if it's not multi-threading then perform a test that does the same RS
sorting via...
http://hbase.apache.org/apidocs/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/client/HTable.html#
getRegionLocation%28byte[http://hbase.apache.org/apidocs/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/client/HTable.html#getRegionLocation%28byte[
]%29
…. and then spin up your own threads (one per target RS) and see what
happens.
On 4/15/13 9:04 AM, Ankit Jain ankitjainc...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Liang,
Thanks Liang for reply..
Ans1:
I tried by using HFile block size of 32 KB and bloom filter is enabled.
The
random read performance is 1 records in 23 secs.
Ans2:
We are retrieving all the 1 rows in one call.
Ans3:
Disk detai:
Model Number: ST2000DM001-1CH164
Serial Number: Z1E276YF
Please suggest some more optimization
Thanks,
Ankit Jain
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 5:11 PM, 谢良 xieli...@xiaomi.com wrote:
First, it's probably helpless to set block size to 4KB, please refer
to
the beginning of HFile.java:
Smaller blocks are good
* for random access, but require more memory to hold the block index,
and
may
* be slower to create (because we must flush the compressor stream at
the
* conclusion of each data block, which leads to an FS I/O flush).
Further, due
* to the internal caching in Compression codec, the smallest possible
block
* size would be around 20KB-30KB.
Second, is it a single-thread test client or multi-threads? we
couldn't
expect too much if the requests are one by one.
Third, could you provide more info about your DN disk numbers and IO
utils ?
Thanks,
Liang
发件人: Ankit Jain [ankitjainc...@gmail.com]
发送时间: 2013年4月15日 18:53
收件人: user@hbase.apache.org
主题: Re: HBase random read performance
Hi Anoop,
Thanks for reply..
I tried by setting Hfile block size 4KB and also enabled the bloom
filter(ROW). The maximum read performance that I was able to achieve
is
1 records in 14 secs (size of record is 1.6KB).
Please suggest some tuning..
Thanks,
Ankit Jain
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 4:12 PM, Rishabh Agrawal
rishabh.agra...@impetus.co.in wrote:
Interesting. Can you explain why this happens?
-Original Message-
From: Anoop Sam John [mailto:anoo...@huawei.com]
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 3:47 PM
To: user@hbase.apache.org
Subject: RE: HBase random read performance
Ankit
I guess you might be having default HFile block
size
which is 64KB.
For random gets a lower value will be better. Try will some thing
like
8KB
and check the latency?
Ya ofcourse blooms can help (if major compaction was not done at the
time
of testing)
-Anoop-
From: Ankit Jain [ankitjainc...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 13, 2013 11:01 AM
To: user@hbase.apache.org
Subject: HBase random read performance
Hi All,
We are using HBase 0.94.5 and Hadoop 1.0.4.
We have HBase cluster of 5 nodes(5 regionservers and 1 master node).
Each
regionserver has 8 GB RAM.
We have loaded 25 millions records in HBase table, regions are
pre-split
into 16 regions
