[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-3242?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12970041#action_12970041
 ] 

Jonathan Gray commented on HBASE-3242:
--------------------------------------

Reading my own comment, I as a little confused.  I'm not saying reducing number 
of files is not good or what would happen, just that, the real goal is reducing 
the need to evict hlogs.  That is done by reducing the aggregate size of the 
hlogs (at least in principle... we use # of logs today but might need to tweak 
that with this stuff since real trade-off is about recovery time and that's 
largely related to size not #files).

> HLog Compactions
> ----------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-3242
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-3242
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: regionserver
>            Reporter: Nicolas Spiegelberg
>
> Currently, our memstore flush algorithm is pretty trivial.  We let it grow to 
> a flushsize and flush a region or grow to a certain log count and then flush 
> everything below a seqid.  In certain situations, we can get big wins from 
> being more intelligent with our memstore flush algorithm.  I suggest we look 
> into algorithms to intelligently handle HLog compactions.  By compaction, I 
> mean replacing existing HLogs with new HLogs created using the contents of a 
> memstore snapshot.  Situations where we can get huge wins:
> 1. In the incrementColumnValue case,  N HLog entries often correspond to a 
> single memstore entry.  Although we may have large HLog files, our memstore 
> could be relatively small.
> 2. If we have a hot region, the majority of the HLog consists of that one 
> region and other region edits would be minuscule.
> In both cases, we are forced to flush a bunch of very small stores.  Its 
> really hard for a compaction algorithm to be efficient when it has no 
> guarantees of the approximate size of a new StoreFile, so it currently does 
> unconditional, inefficient compactions.  Additionally, compactions & flushes 
> suck because they invalidate cache entries: be it memstore or LRUcache.  If 
> we can limit flushes to cases where we will have significant HFile output on 
> a per-Store basis, we can get improved performance, stability, and reduced 
> failover time.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply via email to