Good point! I took the size of the entire store (storefileSizeMB from the
regionserver's web interface), so it makes sense that the split didn't happen.
Thanks,
Adrian
________________________________
From: Stack <st...@duboce.net>
To: hbase-user@hadoop.apache.org
Sent: Wed, March 10, 2010 5:01:56 PM
Subject: Re: non-uniform region splits for index tables
Hey Adrian:
How'd you do the measure of the region size? Did you take the size of
an individual storefile or of the region as a whole? A region will
split as soon as any individual file under the region dir gets >
hbase.hregion.max.filesize.
St.Ack
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 2:52 AM, Adrian Popescu
<popescuadrian2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Sorry, forgot to say that I've changed the hregion filesize to 128MB in
> hbase-site.xml as follows:
>
> <name>hbase.hregion.max.filesize</name>
> <value>134217728</value>
>
> Is any other setting that I miss ?
>
> thank you,
> Adrian
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Jean-Daniel Cryans <jdcry...@apache.org>
> To: hbase-user@hadoop.apache.org
> Sent: Wed, March 10, 2010 12:57:15 AM
> Subject: Re: non-uniform region splits for index tables
>
> A region split happens when a family grows bigger than 256MB, if you
> have less than that in a whole table then it will be hosted in a
> single region.
>
> J-D
>
> On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 3:54 PM, Adrian Popescu
> <popescuadrian2...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I've observed that when creating secondary indexes their corresponding
>> tables are not necessarily uniformly partitioned into region splits (e.g.
>> one region table has 100MB, another one has 200MB); the solution that I
>> found is to force a split on the table. However, my belief was that the load
>> balancing of the data should be done automatically by HBase. Is any
>> particular reason that the balancing of the data doesn't happen
>> automatically on secondary index tables or do I miss some setting ?
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Adrian
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
