Hi Lars,

It's rows/seconds for 1M rows (1M writes, the 1M RandomReads, only
measuring the reads).

I have the same test with 2M running for all 0.94 the releases to see
if it makes a difference.

JM

2013/7/6 lars hofhansl <[email protected]>:
> Are these times or ops/sec, or something else?
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Jean-Marc Spaggiari <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]; lars hofhansl <[email protected]>
> Cc:
> Sent: Friday, July 5, 2013 8:24 PM
> Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] The 1st hbase 0.94.9 release candidate is available
>  for download
>
> I have redo the tests and it's now all very consistent between all the
> recent versions
>
> Min    Max    Average    Min80%    Max80%    Variance    Precision
> hbase-0.94.5    914    1175    929    920    944    172    18.46%
> hbase-0.94.6    913    1176    927    915    954    174    18.80%
> hbase-0.94.7    913    1295    930    919    946    170    18.30%
> hbase-0.94.8    914    947    935    914    945    166    17.78%
> hbase-0.94.9    921    947    936    933    940    164    17.55%
>
> I will try to make the tests last longer to get more precise results...
>
> If we think a few nodes clusters is way beter for the performances
> tracking, then let's work that way. But if we think PE can do the job,
> it's even better ;) I just want to make sure we have accurate results
> and that we performance test the right things...
>
> I will re-run that, update the pdf and upload it again...
>
> JM
>
> 2013/7/4 lars hofhansl <[email protected]>:
>> Thanks for doing all this work!
>>
>> I did find a pretty high variance between the runs, which may be at issue 
>> here.
>>
>> Maybe there are effects that only show on certain setups (disk drives, ram, 
>> jvm version, etc).
>>
>> Maybe we can compare setups offline.
>>
>> -- Lars
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Jean-Marc Spaggiari <[email protected]>
>> To: [email protected]
>> Cc:
>> Sent: Thursday, July 4, 2013 9:25 AM
>> Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] The 1st hbase 0.94.9 release candidate is available
>>  for download
>>
>> Ok. I get similar performances between 0.94.7 and 0.94.9 for the randomRead
>>
>> 0.94.7 => 1124179.9ms
>> 0.94.9 => 1110489.3ms
>>
>> I will re-run the tests one by one for all the 0.94.x versions and
>> update my charts...
>>
>> 2013/7/3 Jean-Marc Spaggiari <[email protected]>:
>>> Ok. Test pass if I run it alone:
>>>
>>> mvn clean test -P runSmallTests -Djava.net.preferIPv4Stack=true
>>> -Dtest=org.apache.hadoop.hbase.coprocessor.TestRegionObserverScannerOpenHook
>>>
>>> -------------------------------------------------------
>>>  T E S T S
>>> -------------------------------------------------------
>>> Running 
>>> org.apache.hadoop.hbase.coprocessor.TestRegionObserverScannerOpenHook
>>> Tests run: 3, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 11.642 sec
>>>
>>> Results :
>>>
>>> Tests run: 3, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> And finally passed on another one:
>>> Results :
>>>
>>> Tests run: 1359, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 13
>>>
>>> [INFO] 
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> [INFO] BUILD SUCCESS
>>> [INFO] 
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> [INFO] Total time: 1:33:34.925s
>>> [INFO] Finished at: Tue Jul 02 16:37:59 EDT 2013
>>> [INFO] Final Memory: 44M/594M
>>> [INFO] 
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>> So it's all +1 for me.
>>>
>>> JM
>>>
>>> 2013/7/2 Elliott Clark <[email protected]>:
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> untared.
>>>> Checked the sig.
>>>> Ran Ycsb.
>>>> Ran PE.
>>>> upgraded from 94.8.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 11:32 AM, lars hofhansl <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> passes fine here too
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> From: Jean-Daniel Cryans <[email protected]>
>>>>> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
>>>>> Cc:
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 2, 2013 11:22 AM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] The 1st hbase 0.94.9 release candidate is 
>>>>> available
>>>>>  for download
>>>>>
>>>>> Yup:
>>>>>
>>>>> Running 
>>>>> org.apache.hadoop.hbase.coprocessor.TestRegionObserverScannerOpenHook
>>>>> Tests run: 3, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 22.756 sec
>>>>>
>>>>> Have you looked at the log to see on what error it fails?
>>>>>
>>>>> J-D
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 11:08 AM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari
>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> JD, does TestRegionObserverScannerOpenHook work for you?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I will retry to run it again on 3 different computers to see.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> JM
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2013/7/1 lars hofhansl <[email protected]>:
>>>>>>> Hah. I let Cody answer here. I didn't like the empty table either, but 
>>>>>>> he preferred it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -- Lars
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>>>  From: Jean-Daniel Cryans <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>; lars hofhansl 
>>>>>>> <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, July 1, 2013 10:35 AM
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] The 1st hbase 0.94.9 release candidate is 
>>>>>>> available for download
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I ran some PE single node tests on both tars, looked at the web UIs
>>>>>>> and logs. I'm +1 on this RC.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My only nit is the way that HBASE-5083 leaves an empty table if there
>>>>>>> are not backup masters is kinda ugly.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> J-D
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 3:51 PM, lars hofhansl <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>> The 1st 0.94.9 RC is available for download at 
>>>>>>>> http://people.apache.org/~larsh/hbase-0.94.9-rc0/
>>>>>>>> Signed with my code signing key: C7CFE328
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Like the previous point releases, 0.94.9 is a primarily a bug fix 
>>>>>>>> release. This RC is comparatively small with 26 issues resolved 
>>>>>>>> against it:
>>>>>>>>     [HBASE-8453] - TestImportExport failing again due to configuration 
>>>>>>>> issues
>>>>>>>>     [HBASE-8494] - TestRemoteAdmin#testClusterStatus should not assume 
>>>>>>>> 'requests' does not change
>>>>>>>>     [HBASE-8522] - Archived hfiles and old hlogs may be deleted 
>>>>>>>> immediately by HFileCleaner, LogCleaner in HMaster
>>>>>>>>     [HBASE-8555] - FilterList correctness may be affected by random 
>>>>>>>> ordering of sub-filter(list)
>>>>>>>>     [HBASE-8590] - [0.94] BlockingMetaScannerVisitor should check for 
>>>>>>>> parent meta entry while waiting for split daughter
>>>>>>>>     [HBASE-8639] - Poor performance of htable#getscanner in 
>>>>>>>> multithreaded environment due to DNS.getDefaultHost() being called in 
>>>>>>>> ScannerCallable#prepare()
>>>>>>>>     [HBASE-8640] - ServerName in master may not initialize with the 
>>>>>>>> configured ipc address of hbase.master.ipc.address
>>>>>>>>     [HBASE-8655] - Backport to 94 - HBASE-8346(Prefetching .META. rows 
>>>>>>>> in case only when useCache is set to true)
>>>>>>>>     [HBASE-8656] - Rpc call may not be notified in SecureClient
>>>>>>>>     [HBASE-8671] - Per-region WAL breaks CP backwards compatibility in 
>>>>>>>> 0.94 for non-enabled case
>>>>>>>>     [HBASE-8684] - Table Coprocessor can't access external HTable by 
>>>>>>>> default
>>>>>>>>     [HBASE-8700] - IntegrationTestBigLinkedList can fail due to random 
>>>>>>>> number collision
>>>>>>>>     [HBASE-8724] - [0.94] ExportSnapshot should not use hbase.tmp.dir 
>>>>>>>> as a staging dir on hdfs
>>>>>>>>     [HBASE-8742] - HTableDescriptor Properties not preserved when 
>>>>>>>> cloning
>>>>>>>>     [HBASE-8743] - upgrade hadoop-23 version to 0.23.7
>>>>>>>>     [HBASE-8749] - Potential race condition between 
>>>>>>>> FSUtils.renameAndSetModifyTime() and HFile/LogCleaner
>>>>>>>>     [HBASE-8762] - Performance/operational penalty when calling 
>>>>>>>> HTable.get with a list of one Get
>>>>>>>>     [HBASE-8783] - RSSnapshotManager.ZKProcedureMemberRpcs may be 
>>>>>>>> initialized with the wrong server name
>>>>>>>>     [HBASE-5083] - Backup HMaster should have http infoport open with 
>>>>>>>> link to the active master
>>>>>>>>     [HBASE-8609] - Make the CopyTable support startRow, stopRow options
>>>>>>>>     [HBASE-8636] - Backport KeyValue Codec to 0.94 (HBASE-7413)
>>>>>>>>     [HBASE-8683] - Add major compaction support in CompactionTool
>>>>>>>>     [HBASE-8692] - [AccessController] Restrict HTableDescriptor 
>>>>>>>> enumeration
>>>>>>>>     [HBASE-8702] - Make WALEditCodec pluggable
>>>>>>>>     [HBASE-8504] - HTable.getRegionsInRange() should provide a 
>>>>>>>> non-cached API
>>>>>>>>     [HBASE-8603] - Backport HBASE-6921 to 0.94
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The full list of changes is also available here: 
>>>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12324431
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please try out the RC, check out the doc, take it for a spin, etc, and 
>>>>>>>> vote +1/-1 by July 2nd on whether we should release this as 0.94.9.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The release testing spreadsheet is available here:
>>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AvLqcVIqNtlTdGFHaktDR0FqLWdtQWZwdncyVzE3Z2c#gid=0
>>>>>>>> (if you test this release, please add your test to this spreadsheet, 
>>>>>>>> so that we can gauge the coverage)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -- Lars
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ps. I will likely be without access to the Internet for the next five 
>>>>>>>> days
>>>>>
>>
>

Reply via email to