[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10531?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13930100#comment-13930100
]
ramkrishna.s.vasudevan commented on HBASE-10531:
------------------------------------------------
So with the same environment, with same setup and random reads with 5 clients
the difference between no copy and the exisiting way was about ~0.2 to 0.5 %
degradation. But that is not very scientific.
> Revisit how the key byte[] is passed to HFileScanner.seekTo and reseekTo
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-10531
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10531
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Reporter: ramkrishna.s.vasudevan
> Assignee: ramkrishna.s.vasudevan
> Fix For: 0.99.0
>
> Attachments: HBASE-10531.patch, HBASE-10531_1.patch,
> HBASE-10531_2.patch
>
>
> Currently the byte[] key passed to HFileScanner.seekTo and
> HFileScanner.reseekTo, is a combination of row, cf, qual, type and ts. And
> the caller forms this by using kv.getBuffer, which is actually deprecated.
> So see how this can be achieved considering kv.getBuffer is removed.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
