It’s hadoop-2.8.5.

But I do not think it makes much difference, we just use the same server
setup, only different clients implementation.

Sakthi <sakthivel.azh...@gmail.com>于2019年6月14日 周五10:18写道:

> Duo,
>
> What version on Hadoop did you use in the 5 node cluster for your
> comparisons? For what it's worth, I would also like to try out the PE/LTT
> comparison of both the clients. Or, if any other form of comparison would
> be helpful then I'm open for suggestions and would like to give it a try.
>
> Sakthi
>
> On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 4:55 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > It will be transparent, mostly, the interface is still kept. There are
> some
> > incompatible behaviors, for example, now admin.split will wait till the
> > split is actually done, while in the old time it will return immediately
> > after we send the request to master.
> >
> > Jean-Marc Spaggiari <jean-m...@spaggiari.org>于2019年6月13日 周四23:26写道:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Is this going to change the way the client should be called? Or it will
> > be
> > > mostly transparent replacement?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > JMS
> > >
> > > Le jeu. 13 juin 2019 à 02:13, 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com> a
> > > écrit :
> > >
> > > > Josh Elser <els...@apache.org> 于2019年6月12日周三 下午10:00写道:
> > > >
> > > > > Nice perf results!
> > > > >
> > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-22237 looks like it's
> > also
> > > > > good to be resolved, given
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://builds.apache.org/job/HBASE%20Nightly/job/HBASE-21512/279/testReport/
> > > > > (TestLogLevel will be fixed on your rebase/merge).
> > > > >
> > > > > Poking through the PR, it looks like the big change is that we're
> > also
> > > > > defaulting over to use the [sync]ConnectionOverAsyncConnection.
> Good
> > to
> > > > > do it now to help iron things out more. Calling it out to make sure
> > > > > others see this. Is it still possible to use the old Connection
> impl?
> > > (I
> > > > > think the answer is "no").
> > > > >
> > > > No, all the code have been purged...
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Only other question: are there updates for the book that should
> > happen
> > > > > before you move past this? What about "knobs" for configuring
> > retries,
> > > > > internal thread pool(s)? Anything like that you think would be
> > > important
> > > > > for people to tweak?
> > > > >
> > > >  Will fill a 'fat' release note soon. I think there will be less
> > > parameters
> > > > to tune, as we do not need any thread pools unless you are using
> > > > coprocessor related methods(which are deprecated and we recommend
> users
> > > to
> > > > use the ones in async client interface). The retry config is still
> the
> > > same
> > > > with the old sync client.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > +1
> > > > >
> > > > > On 6/11/19 5:48 AM, 张铎(Duo Zhang) wrote:
> > > > > > Filed  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-22564
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com> 于2019年6月11日周二 下午3:53写道:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Let me do a YCSB test about the performance.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Stack <st...@duboce.net> 于2019年6月11日周二 下午1:15写道:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>> +1 on merge from me.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> It removes the complicated multi-threaded edifice we'd built
> > > > > client-side
> > > > > >>> to
> > > > > >>> fake an async behavior replacing it with an actual async
> > > > > implementation.
> > > > > >>> Users will immediately notice a radical plummet in working
> thread
> > > > > count on
> > > > > >>> the client side.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> For the cleanup of old idioms alone, in test code in
> particular,
> > > the
> > > > > patch
> > > > > >>> is worth merging.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Any perf numbers to share comparing old sync and async?
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> What about difference in operation? Is there any commentary or
> > doc
> > > or
> > > > > >>> release note to point at?
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Thanks,
> > > > > >>> S
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 6:59 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
> > > palomino...@gmail.com
> > > > >
> > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-21512
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> "Reimplement sync client based on async client"
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> The jira title tells everything. This is what I promised when
> I
> > > > first
> > > > > >>>> introduced the async client in HBase, about three years ago,
> > that
> > > > the
> > > > > >>> sync
> > > > > >>>> client can be implemented on top of the async client, so we
> can
> > > > remove
> > > > > >>> the
> > > > > >>>> old sync client implementation, which can reduce our client
> code
> > > > base
> > > > > a
> > > > > >>>> lot.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> I've already opened a PR here, and received several
> > > feedback(thanks
> > > > > >>> stack!)
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/287
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> It shows that we add 8,663 lines and remove 31,386 lines.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> This is the flaky dashboard for this branch
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://builds.apache.org/job/HBASE-Find-Flaky-Tests/job/HBASE-21512/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/dashboard.html
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> With the recent efforts I think it is getting better.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> Will fill the release note soon, it will be a fat one.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> Please vote
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> [] +1
> > > > > >>>> [] +0/-0
> > > > > >>>> [] -1 Do not merge the branch back because ...
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> Thanks. Any suggestions are welcomed.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to