Its 0.94.6 and there is chance that the issue has been fixed already Simple table: one column + one qualifier
Two type of scans: 1. Scan.addFamily(CF) 2. Scan.addColumn(CF, CQ) Both run on block cache (all data in memory) Tested on StoreScanner directly. 1. 4.2M KVs per sec per one thread 2. 1.5M KVs per second per one thread. The difference? First scanner's ScanQueryMatcher returns INCLUDE, DONE, second - INCLUDE_NEXT_ROW, DONE The cost of Row's reseek is huge. Best regards, Vladimir Rodionov Principal Platform Engineer Carrier IQ, www.carrieriq.com e-mail: [email protected] Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this message, including any attachments hereto, may be confidential and is intended to be read only by the individual or entity to whom this message is addressed. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent or designee of the intended recipient, please note that any review, use, disclosure or distribution of this message or its attachments, in any form, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender and/or [email protected] and delete or destroy any copy of this message and its attachments.
