Interesting. I suppose if the balancer remembered what it had recently moved and let some time elapse before it moved the recently moved, would that do? St.Ack
On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 11:26 PM, Anty <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 11:02 AM, Stack <[email protected]> wrote: > >> If compacting, don't we interrupt it so we can close and move the >> region. You are worried about the compacting work done so far -- you >> don't want to lose it? So you are suggesting that a region should be >> able to say "No, not now! I'm busy?" (We'd need to distingush between >> a balancer 'move' and a move or close for any other region). >> > Yes, that's exactly what i want to convey. > Can this consideration be included in balancer? > >> >> St.Ack >> >> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 7:44 PM, Anty <[email protected]> wrote: >> > When doing balance, Can we take into account the compaction status of >> > regions. >> > Currently, even the region is doing compaction, it can also be >> interrupted >> > to response to reassign. >> > >> > >> > On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 12:57 AM, Schubert Zhang <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> >> Thanks, I think it is HBASE-3373 >> >> >> >> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 11:33 PM, Ted Yu <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> > I think your request is described in >> >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-3373 >> >> > >> >> > Practically speaking, the scenario below can hardly occur (in trunk, >> at >> >> > least). >> >> > If the tables are created with pre-split regions, the regions would be >> >> > round-robin distributed. >> >> > If the tables are created with single region, subsequent write >> operations >> >> > would cause the region split. Balancer would offload young regions to >> >> other >> >> > servers - see HBASE-3609 >> >> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-3609>which is not in >> 0.90 >> >> > branch. >> >> > >> >> > Refer to >> >> > >> http://zhihongyu.blogspot.com/2011/04/load-balancer-in-hbase-090.htmlfor >> >> > details. >> >> > >> >> > Cheers >> >> > >> >> > On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 12:25 AM, Schubert Zhang <[email protected]> >> >> > wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > I have a question about HBase balancer. >> >> > > >> >> > > In release 0.90.x, it seems the balancer only regards the number of >> >> > regions >> >> > > and balance these regions into every regionserver. >> >> > > >> >> > > If we have two tables (A and B) now, each have 100 regions. >> >> > > Then, a extreme situation is: >> >> > > >> >> > > RegionsServer1: 100 regions, which all belong to table A >> >> > > RegionsServer2: 100 regions, which all belong to table B >> >> > > >> >> > > If my application access table B heavy, the almost all opetations >> hit >> >> > > RegionsServer2, it is not balance. >> >> > > >> >> > > I have a idea about the balance policy: >> >> > > (1) Firstly balance for each table >> >> > > (2) Then, overall balance. >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > Schubert >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Best Regards >> > Anty Rao >> > >> > > > > -- > Best Regards > Anty Rao >
