[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3288?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12591389#action_12591389
 ] 

stack commented on HADOOP-3288:
-------------------------------

One thing I've wondered is how expensive the pause transitioning over blocks 
when DFS streaming big files; i.e. how much does the teardown of current 
exhausted blocks' socket and setup of the new socket against the datanode that 
has the next block cost latency-wise streaming through a multi-block file.

> Serial streaming performance should be Math.min(ideal client performance, 
> ideal serial hdfs performance)
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HADOOP-3288
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-3288
>             Project: Hadoop Core
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: dfs
>    Affects Versions: 0.16.3, 0.18.0
>         Environment: Mac OS X  10.5.2, Java 6
>            Reporter: Sam Pullara
>             Fix For: 0.18.0
>
>
> I looked at all the code long and hard and this was my analysis (could be 
> wrong, I'm not an expert on this codebase):
> Current Serial HDFS performance = Average Datanode Performance
> Average Datanode Performance = Average Disk Performance (even if you have 
> more than one)
> We should have:
> Ideal Serial HDFS Performance = Sum of Ideal Datanode Performance
> Ideal Datanode Performance = Sum of disk performance
> When you read a single file serially from HDFS there are a number of 
> limitations that come into play:
> 1) Blocks on multiple datanodes will be load balanced between them - 
> averaging the performance of the datanodes
> 2) Blocks on multiple disks in a single datanode are load balanced between 
> them - averaging the performance of the disks
> I think that all this could be fixed if we actually prefetched fully read 
> blocks on the client until the client can no longer keep up with the data or 
> there is another bottleneck like network bandwidth.
> This seems like a reasonably common use case though not the typical MapReduce 
> case.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply via email to