Oh, sorry. There was some formating, seems it got lost... Here is the Google document: http://goo.gl/1uHs98
Let me know if it's better. JM 2014-07-03 9:55 GMT-04:00 Ted Yu <[email protected]>: > Jean-Marc: > Thanks for posting results. > > It is not easy to read. > Can you reformat the results ? > > On Jul 3, 2014, at 6:10 AM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Here are the perfs tests results. Someone on the user list asked few days > > ago about perfs between 0.94 and 0.98. So I have put also 0.98 on my > > results here. Basically, as I said yesterday, no negativ perf impact for > > 0.94.21. Each test run 10 times (except the last 4) and I remove the 2 > > extremes. > > > > JM > > > > > > 0.94.200.94.21 0.98.2FilteredScanTest 0,230,22 0,25RandomReadTest 808815 > > 1 107RandomSeekScanTest 172169 201RandomScanWithRange10Test 286279 277 > > RandomScanWithRange100Test 147145 161RandomScanWithRange1000Test 38,22 > 37,27 > > 50 SequentialReadTest1 217 1 1991 392 SequentialWriteTest13 732 13 39119 > 455 > > RandomWriteTest14 091 13 64219 708 GaussianRandomReadBenchmark9 404 9 435 > > 10 777 SequentialReadBenchmark2 938 638 3 074 8153 335 239 > > SequentialWriteBenchmark912 469 913 573833 654 UniformRandomReadBenchmark > > 10 299 10 35811 762 UniformRandomSmallScan233 583 234 083277 850 > > LoadTestToolreal 19m30.113s > > user 37m12.300s > > sys 11m19.224s real 19m26.099s > > user 36m1.740s > > sys 11m41.704sreal 14m40.709s > > user 28m56.892s > > sys 12m6.364sIntegrationTestLoadAnVerify real 4m11.269s > > user 1m32.904s > > sys 0m7.176s real 4m7.288s > > user 1m31.704s > > sys 0m6.780sreal 2m38.295s > > user 1m24.500s > > sys 0m6.036sHLogPerformanceEvaluation 10431,988 10629,025n/a > > IntegrationTestBigLinkedListreal 6m0.125s > > user 3m0.004s > > sys 0m11.312s real 6m17.616s > > user 2m58.684s > > sys 0m10.492S real 9m9.284s > > user 3m31.576s > > sys 0m19.828s > > > > > > 2014-07-02 21:22 GMT-04:00 Jean-Marc Spaggiari <[email protected] > >: > > > >> So far performances are similar to 0.94.21. So green from my side too. I > >> will post detailed results later tonight or tomorrow morning. > >> > >> JM > >> > >> > >> 2014-07-02 18:29 GMT-04:00 lars hofhansl <[email protected]>: > >> > >> Thanks Ted & Andy. > >>> With my +1 we have the required 3 binding votes, will release 0.94.21 > >>> tomorrow. > >>> > >>> -- Lars > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> ________________________________ > >>> From: Ted Yu <[email protected]> > >>> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > >>> Sent: Wednesday, July 2, 2014 1:25 PM > >>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] The 1st hbase 0.94.21 release candidate is > available > >>> for download > >>> > >>> > >>> +1 > >>> > >>> Checked md5 sum > >>> Checked signature > >>> Apache RAT check passes. > >>> Unit test suite passed (using jdk 1.7.0_25) > >>> > >>> Cheers > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Andrew Purtell <[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> +1 > >>>> > >>>> MD5 sum is good > >>>> Signature is good > >>>> Unpacked tarball, structure looks good. > >>>> Ran Apache RAT, check passed**. > >>>> Local compile and build was successful (with 7u60) > >>>> Unit test suite passes 10 times out of 10 > >>>> Ran LoadTestTool, no errors, logs look good. > >>>> > >>>> ** - You have to remove docs/ and generated web.xml files under > >>>> hbase-webapps/ first. Going forward I think we should release a source > >>> only > >>>> tarball and a second -bin "binary convenience" artifact. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 2:20 PM, lars hofhansl <[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> The 1st 0.94.21 RC is available for download at > >>>>> http://people.apache.org/~larsh/hbase-0.94.21-rc0/ > >>>>> Signed with my code signing key: C7CFE328 > >>>>> > >>>>> 0.94 development is continuing to wind down, HBase 0.94.21 is a small > >>> bug > >>>>> fix release with 9 fixes: > >>>>> [HBASE-10692] - The Multi TableMap job don't support the security > >>>>> HBase cluster > >>>>> [HBASE-11052] - Sending random data crashes thrift service > >>>>> [HBASE-11096] - stop method of Master and RegionServer > >>> coprocessor is > >>>>> not invoked > >>>>> [HBASE-11234] - FastDiffDeltaEncoder#getFirstKeyInBlock returns > >>> wrong > >>>>> result > >>>>> [HBASE-11341] - ZKProcedureCoordinatorRpcs should respond only to > >>>>> members > >>>>> [HBASE-11414] - Backport to 0.94: HBASE-7711 rowlock release > >>> problem > >>>>> with thread interruptions in batchMutate > >>>>> [HBASE-8495] - Change ownership of the directory to bulk load > >>>>> [HBASE-10871] - Indefinite OPEN/CLOSE wait on busy RegionServers > >>>>> [HBASE-10935] - support snapshot policy where flush memstore can > >>> be > >>>>> skipped to prevent production cluster freeze > >>>>> > >>>>> The list of changes is also available here: > >>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=12310753&version=12326794 > >>>>> > >>>>> Here's the test run for this RC: > >>>>> https://builds.apache.org/job/HBase-0.94.21/30/ > >>>>> > >>>>> Please try out the RC, check out the doc, take it for a spin, etc, > and > >>>>> vote +1/-1 by EOD July 3rd on whether we should release this as > >>> 0.94.21. > >>>>> > >>>>> Thanks. > >>>>> > >>>>> -- Lars > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Best regards, > >>>> > >>>> - Andy > >>>> > >>>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet > Hein > >>>> (via Tom White) > >> > >> >
