Any examples which we could follow? This is not a user visible feature, so not sure what is the best way to mention it in the ref guide.
2018-03-27 23:47 GMT+08:00 Sean Busbey <bus...@apache.org>: > Could y'all get some of this into the reference guide? Talks and > release notes are great, but I really want us to make sure operators > have a nice place to figure out all the stuff we're landing in 2.0. > > On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 10:13 AM, Yu Li <car...@gmail.com> wrote: > > @Mike > > FWIW, besides checking the JIRAs and codes, the talk Duo gave in our > > HBaseCon 2016 may help you better understand the whole picture, please > > check page 14 to 20 of this presentation > > <https://www.slideshare.net/HBaseCon/apache-hbase- > improvements-and-practices-at-xiaomi> > > on > > slideshare. > > > > Best Regards, > > Yu > > > > On 27 March 2018 at 14:26, 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> 2018-03-27 12:35 GMT+08:00 Mike Drob <md...@apache.org>: > >> > >> > Hi folks, > >> > > >> > I've been working on some of the docs relating to the upcoming 2.0 > >> release > >> > and have struggled to find content around AsyncWAL. My impression is > that > >> > this is a pretty important new feature, yet there's nothing in the ref > >> > guide about it. > >> > > >> > Does it have a different name that I'm not familiar with? > >> > > >> > If it's not in the ref guide, should I file a JIRA issue for somebody > to > >> > generate that content? Specific things that I'd be looking for are: > >> > - How to enable/disable > >> > > >> See HBASE-15536, just like the old way, config hbase.wal.provider > >> > >> > - How does this impact data durability, MTTR, failover scenarios, etc. > >> > > >> Does not impact these things. > >> > >> > - How does this impact replication > >> > > >> Ditto. > >> > >> > - Which configuration knobs exist and when would I want to tune them > >> > > >> Usually you do not need to tune anything... > >> Before committing HBASE-15536 we have done a lot of performance > testings. > >> There are two configs which may effect performance, one > >> is hbase.wal.batch.size, and the other > >> is hbase.wal.async.use-shared-event-loop. But it is hard to say how to > >> tune > >> them... > >> And another thing is that, with AsyncFSWAL we can set a lower timeout > when > >> writing WAL, but now it just shares the common dfs configuration. Maybe > we > >> should file an issue for it. > >> > >> > > >> > As a last resort, I can try to dig through RNs in existing issues, but > >> > that's been pretty hit or miss (mostly miss) for me so far too. > >> > > >> > I think at least we need to mention the reason why we introduce > >> AsyncFSWAL > >> and make it default for 2.0 in our refguide. > >> > >> > Thanks, > >> > Mike > >> > > >> >
