increasing threads would increase performance - but of course it's
subject to limitations of what hbase end can do.

sometime recently, we had run a similar benchmark (4 RS, 16 disks) and
random iops over a very large dataset scaled from 85 op/s...@~10ms to
500op/s...@50ms peak. I don't remember the number of threads at the peak
(it was about 30-50 i believe). for these sort of benchmarks - we have
tried many-thre...@single-machine to few-thre...@multiple-machines -
and there's been some difference (in favor of the latter) - but not
significant (particularly for random reads). (so client side
multithreading issues are not significant for this sort of test).

in our case - the data set was large enough that we were bound by the
disk reads (by DFS) (iostat showed heavy disk traffic). Depending on
ur data size and key locality - the speedup may be more.

we weren't using lzo compression (that would have produced better
numbers most likely).

On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 1:39 PM, Boris Aleksandrovsky
<balek...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have a moderately large HBase table of about 1M rows distributed across 4
> region servers. I also have a requirement to retrieve a 1000 rows from that
> table (one can assume keys are randomly distributed) at the same time. I
> would ideally like to have a facility to batch read of all 1000 rows at the
> same time, but I do not think HBase has such a facility. The only way I was
> able to find is to sequentially retrieve one row at a time using Get row
> API. Is there a way to improve on it?
>
> One way I can think of is to create an HTable object pool and issue
> concurrent requests to HBase. This would probably help, but I do not expect
> for performance to increase X time, where X is the number of threads in my
> application.
>
> Is there a clever way to batch requests, so at least you can issue multiple
> row reads to the same region server at the same time? Any other tricks or
> suggestions will be appreciated.
>
> --
> Thanks,
>
> Boris
> http://twitter.com/baleksan
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/baleksan
>

Reply via email to