[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-4365?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13102878#comment-13102878
]
Todd Lipcon commented on HBASE-4365:
------------------------------------
bq. My comment about load balancer was assuming there're many tables in the
cluster.
I guess I'm confused how this is related to the region size heuristic. This is
a general LB concern, but shouldn't be worse/better due to this heuristic,
right?
bq. My second comment originated from our practice of pre-splitting tables. It
is possible that R == 5S would be reached soon after the creation of the table
for small-medium sized cluster.
In that case, isn't it a good thing that we'd automatically set the region size
to be fairly large? ie if you've pre-split to _5S_ regions, then you probably
don't want it to keeps splitting faster on you.
> Add a decent heuristic for region size
> --------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-4365
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-4365
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Affects Versions: 0.94.0
> Reporter: Todd Lipcon
>
> A few of us were brainstorming this morning about what the default region
> size should be. There were a few general points made:
> - in some ways it's better to be too-large than too-small, since you can
> always split a table further, but you can't merge regions currently
> - with HFile v2 and multithreaded compactions there are fewer reasons to
> avoid very-large regions (10GB+)
> - for small tables you may want a small region size just so you can
> distribute load better across a cluster
> - for big tables, multi-GB is probably best
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
