+1 to merge to master. Great job Zheng

On Sat, Jun 22, 2019, 8:41 AM Guanghao Zhang <zghao...@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1 for merge this to master.
>
> OpenInx <open...@gmail.com> 于2019年6月21日周五 下午2:56写道:
>
> > Update:
> >
> > The ByteBuffer pread backport is under reviewing now.
> > https://github.com/apache/hadoop/pull/997
> >
> > As Hadoop team said,  the Hadoop 2.8 will be EOL soon, so our HDFS team
> > will backport this patch to
> > branch-2 & branch-2.9,  we may need to upgrade the hadoop dependencies
> from
> > 2.8.5 to 2.9.3 in future.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 10:41 PM OpenInx <open...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Thanks for your reviewing and flaky test checking, Duo.
> > > Will file a separate issue to address your comment if necessary.
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 9:55 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> +1 from me.
> > >>
> > >> Left a few comments on github PR, not big problems. And the flaky
> > >> dashboard
> > >> is pretty good.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> https://builds.apache.org/job/HBASE-Find-Flaky-Tests/job/HBASE-21879/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/dashboard.html
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> The TestConnectionImplementation was also failing on master, and was
> > fixed
> > >> after merging back HBASE-21512.
> > >>
> > >> 张铎(Duo Zhang) <palomino...@gmail.com> 于2019年6月18日周二 下午9:48写道:
> > >>
> > >> > Good. Will take a look soon.
> > >> >
> > >> > OpenInx <open...@gmail.com> 于2019年6月18日周二 下午9:41写道:
> > >> >
> > >> >> > Could please open a PR, just like what I have done for
> HBASE-21512,
> > >> so
> > >> >> that others could have a overall view on the modified code?
> > >> >>
> > >> >> OK,  created a PR for this:
> https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/320
> > >> >> Thanks for your suggestion, Duo.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 9:24 PM 张铎(Duo Zhang) <
> palomino...@gmail.com
> > >
> > >> >> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > The performance number is great.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > Could please open a PR, just like what I have done for
> HBASE-21512,
> > >> so
> > >> >> that
> > >> >> > others could have a overall view on the modified code?
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > Thanks.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > OpenInx <open...@gmail.com> 于2019年6月18日周二 下午6:58写道:
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > > BTW,  when testing this branch,  we found some performance
> issues
> > >> >> about
> > >> >> > > HDFS Client:
> > >> >> > > 1.  we reduced the DFS client's heap allocation from 45% to 27%
> > >> >> > > in HDFS-14535 [1];
> > >> >> > > 2.  we also increased get throughput by 17.8% in disabled block
> > >> cache
> > >> >> > case
> > >> >> > > in HDFS-14541[2].
> > >> >> > >      In theory, it should also helps a lot (especially
> p99/p999)
> > >> even
> > >> >> if
> > >> >> > RS
> > >> >> > > has a high cacheHitRatio.
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > I think the next HDFS 2.8 release will include those patches,
> > >> they're
> > >> >> > very
> > >> >> > > good points for our
> > >> >> > > HBase performance.
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > [1]. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-14535
> > >> >> > > [2].
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >>
> > >>
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-14541?focusedCommentId=16866472&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-16866472
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > Thanks.
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 12:05 PM OpenInx <open...@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > > The HBASE-21879 has lots of changes: 123 files changed, 5833
> > >> >> > > > insertions(+), 3015 deletions(-).
> > >> >> > > > Currently we developed this issue based on master branch, and
> > >> >> expect to
> > >> >> > > > release it in future HBase3.x.
> > >> >> > > > Of course, if branch-2 want this feature we can do the
> > backport,
> > >> >> should
> > >> >> > > > have some conflicts now but I
> > >> >> > > > don't think it would be hard to fix because I believe the
> > >> branch-2
> > >> >> > > > shouldn't have so much diff with master now
> > >> >> > > > (at least in read path).
> > >> >> > > > The first priority thing for now,   I think it would be
> merging
> > >> the
> > >> >> > > > HBASE-21879 branch to master branch
> > >> >> > > > before diverging.  After that, I can do the backport.
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> >> > > > Thanks for your suggestion, Guanghao !
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> >> > > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 11:39 AM Guanghao Zhang <
> > >> zghao...@gmail.com
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > > > wrote:
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> >> > > >> This is a improvement not a new feature? So backport to
> > >> branch-2,
> > >> >> too?
> > >> >> > > >>
> > >> >> > > >> OpenInx <open...@gmail.com> 于2019年6月17日周一 下午2:45写道:
> > >> >> > > >>
> > >> >> > > >> > Dear HBase dev:
> > >> >> > > >> >
> > >> >> > > >> > In HBASE-21879[1], we redesigned the offheap read path:
> read
> > >> the
> > >> >> > > >> HFileBlock
> > >> >> > > >> > from HDFS to pooled offheap
> > >> >> > > >> > ByteBuffers directly, while before HBASE-21879 we just
> read
> > >> the
> > >> >> > > >> HFileBlock
> > >> >> > > >> > to heap which would still lead
> > >> >> > > >> > to high GC pressure.
> > >> >> > > >> >
> > >> >> > > >> > After few months of development and testing, all subtasks
> > have
> > >> >> been
> > >> >> > > >> > resovled now except the HBASE-21946[2]
> > >> >> > > >> > (It depends on HDFS-14483[3] and our HDFS teams are
> working
> > on
> > >> >> this,
> > >> >> > > we
> > >> >> > > >> > expect the HDFS-14483 to be included
> > >> >> > > >> > in hadoop 2.8.6 and after that the HBASE-21946 will get
> > >> >> resolved).
> > >> >> > we
> > >> >> > > >> think
> > >> >> > > >> > the feature is stable enough now and it's
> > >> >> > > >> > time to merge branch HBASE-21879 back to master now.
> > >> >> > > >> >
> > >> >> > > >> > We have designed 3 test cases to prove the performance
> > >> improvment
> > >> >> > with
> > >> >> > > >> > HBASE-21879:
> > >> >> > > >> > 1. Disabled BlockCache, which means the cacheHitRatio is
> 0%;
> > >> >> > > >> > 2. CacheHitRatio~65%;
> > >> >> > > >> > 3. CachehHitRatio~100%;
> > >> >> > > >> >
> > >> >> > > >> > In our performance results[4], we can see that: the case#1
> > >> have
> > >> >> an
> > >> >> > > great
> > >> >> > > >> > performance improvement
> > >> >> > > >> > (
> > >> >> > > >> > *throughput increased about 17%, heap allocation decreased
> > >> about
> > >> >> > 95%,
> > >> >> > > >> Young
> > >> >> > > >> > generaion size decreased about 81.7%*), that's because
> after
> > >> >> > > HBASE-21879
> > >> >> > > >> > all reads will allocate from pooled offheap bytebuffers
> > >> >> > > >> > and almost no heap allocation, while before HBASE-21879
> the
> > >> read
> > >> >> > path
> > >> >> > > >> will
> > >> >> > > >> > create so many heap allocations.
> > >> >> > > >> > On the other hand, from the testing results of case#2 and
> > >> case#3
> > >> >> we
> > >> >> > > can
> > >> >> > > >> > also see that:
> > >> >> > > >> >
> > >> >> > > >> > *As the cacheHitRatioincreasing, the difference between
> > >> >> > > >> before-HBASE-21879
> > >> >> > > >> > and after-HBASE-21879 will decrease, when cacheHitRatio is
> > >> 100%,
> > >> >> > they
> > >> >> > > >> > almost have no much difference in both throughput and
> > >> latency.*
> > >> >> > > >> >
> > >> >> > > >> > For more details please see the document[4].  Thanks
> > >> >> > > >> > Anoop/Ram/DuoZhang/Stack/GuanghaoZhang very much
> > >> >> > > >> > for your meticulous work (Suggession, discussion, patch
> > >> >> reviewing,
> > >> >> > doc
> > >> >> > > >> > reviewing etc).
> > >> >> > > >> >
> > >> >> > > >> > Please vote
> > >> >> > > >> >
> > >> >> > > >> > [] +1
> > >> >> > > >> > [] +0/-0
> > >> >> > > >> > [] -1 Do not merge the branch back because...
> > >> >> > > >> >
> > >> >> > > >> > Thanks. Any suggestions are welcomed.
> > >> >> > > >> >
> > >> >> > > >> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-21879
> > >> >> > > >> > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-21946
> > >> >> > > >> > [3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-14483
> > >> >> > > >> > [4]
> > >> >> > > >> >
> > >> >> > > >> >
> > >> >> > > >>
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >>
> > >>
> >
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xSy9axGxafoH-Qc17zbD2Bd--rWjjI00xTWQZ8ZwI_E
> > >> >> > > >> >
> > >> >> > > >>
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> >
> > >> >>
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to