[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-9775?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13799926#comment-13799926
]
Nicolas Liochon commented on HBASE-9775:
----------------------------------------
bq. Sure I can! Do you have a patch for 0.94? Or only trunk so far?
I would love to see how 96 RC 5 behaves on the test suite you ran a few months
ago on HBASE-6295, as well as 0.94.12: when you ran the tests back them, we
were seeing a 50% perf improvement on the write path. I had something similar
on a ~10 nodes cluster. Doing the test again would help to see if we have a
perf problem or a scalability problem.
bq. Nicolas Liochon One of the things you asked for earlier was running this
with CMS. Just did it with a much smaller heap (19g vs 29.9g) it still fails at
about the same place, though it takes longer to get to the same spot.
It was actually Nick who asked, but the result is very interesting. As well, in
the logs you have ~1s stop-the-world if I understand correctly? Our defaults
sockets timeouts are usually around 30 th seconds, but I wonder if we don't
have here the impact of hbase.rpc.timeout (default to 60s): we lower the
timeout during the retries iirc. If it's possible, I would love to see the full
logs of one RS. The responseTooSlow is strange too compared to the
stop-the-world time.
> Client write path perf issues
> -----------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-9775
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-9775
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Client
> Affects Versions: 0.96.0
> Reporter: Elliott Clark
> Priority: Critical
> Attachments: Charts Search Cloudera Manager - ITBLL.png, Charts
> Search Cloudera Manager.png, hbase-9775.patch, job_run.log, short_ycsb.png,
> ycsb_insert_94_vs_96.png, ycsb.png
>
>
> Testing on larger clusters has not had the desired throughput increases.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1#6144)
