Thanks for your feedback. I will modify the patch to go with the 3rd option instead of the 2nd one.
JM 2013/2/27 Ted <[email protected]>: > Thanks for your quick action. > > I think the third option is better - we get performance comparison without > repeating the test. > > Cheers > > On Feb 27, 2013, at 5:18 AM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Just opened HBASE-7953. Can you please take a look at it? >> >> There was 3 ways to fix that. >> >> 1) Simply exit the loop when scanner.next() return false >> 2) Exit the loop and restart the test >> 3) Count the number of scanner.next() effectively done and measure >> performances based on that and not on the ROW_COUNT value. >> >> I chose the 2nd one, but maybe there is some preferences for the 3rd one? >> >> JM >> >> 2013/2/27 Jean-Marc Spaggiari <[email protected]>: >>> Yep, I will open one and submit (and not commit ;) ) a patch. >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> JM >>> >>> 2013/2/27 Ted <[email protected]>: >>>> Looks like a bug. >>>> >>>> Mind opening Jira ? >>>> >>>> Thanks >>>> >>>> On Feb 27, 2013, at 4:32 AM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> In HFilePerformanceEvaluation, there is 2 places where we are doing >>>>> scanner.next() but still trying to read the key and/or the value. This >>>>> is failing. I'm wondering if there is any logic behind that or if I >>>>> can fix it. >>>>> >>>>> JM >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> for (int ii = 0; ii < 30; ii++) { >>>>> if (!scanner.next()) { >>>>> System.out.println("NOTHING FOLLOWS"); >>>>> } >>>>> scanner.getKey(); >>>>> scanner.getValue(); >>>>> }
