Thanks JM, HBASE-8450 (r1485562) is interesting. It increases (among other things) the block cache percentage from 24 to 40%, which would lead to a higher probability of a future random read to hit an already cached block.
-- Lars ----- Original Message ----- From: Jean-Marc Spaggiari <[email protected]> To: [email protected]; lars hofhansl <[email protected]> Cc: Sent: Friday, June 28, 2013 1:18 PM Subject: Re: 30% random performance in 0.95+ I have the script done to run over a list of "svn releases", so if required, just give me a bunch of them or a range and I can restart. Just keep me posted. JM 2013/6/28 lars hofhansl <[email protected]>: > I did a few more test (on my laptop, which is not quite representative), and > found only a 2-3% improvement from HBASE-8001+HBASE-8012 in the end. > I'll look through the issues that you identified. > > -- Lars > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Jean-Marc Spaggiari <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Cc: > Sent: Friday, June 28, 2013 12:51 PM > Subject: Re: 30% random performance in 0.95+ > > Sorry folks, > > I'm a bit late to run the tests... 0.94.8 and 0.94.9 are currently > running, but here is what I have been able to capture so far for 0.95 > over the last year: > r1357480 1513196 > r1367009 1440244.4 > r1375812 1287143.5 > r1381671 1287200.2 > r1388620 1295262.6 > r1394335 1022140.2 > r1403898 884171.9 > r1410631 804229.9 > r1419787 846816.9 > r1426557 853535.3 > r1433514 873265.1 > r1438972 840666.9 > r1446106 877432.2 > r1452661 883974.8 > r1458421 882233.3 > r1464267 847000.8 > r1478964 877433.5 > r1485868 744905.5 > r1494869 765105.9 > > So seems that there was some improvements between r1367009 and > r1403898 but they are old. Also another major improvement between > r1478964 and r1485868... > > Let me know if you want me to dig further and I will be very happy to do so. > > JM > > 2013/6/28 Stack <[email protected]>: >> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 10:53 AM, lars hofhansl <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I partially tracked this down to HBASE-8001 and HBASE-8012 by looking at >>> the call stacks in a profiling session. >>> HBASE-8767 is a backport of both patched to 0.94. >>> >> >> Sounds like nice work by Raymond Liu... >> St.Ack >
