[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-4365?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13103076#comment-13103076
]
Todd Lipcon commented on HBASE-4365:
------------------------------------
Hmm, that would suggest a heuristic based not on number of regions, but based
on total table size. However, it seems like a bit of an edge case.
Perhaps we can make this a pluggable policy like so: allow max region size to
be either a class name or an integer. If it's a class name, it refers to an
implementation of some interface like {{MaxRegionSizeCalculator}}. If it's an
integer, it acts the same as today (fixed size). Then we could easily
experiment with different heuristics.
> 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
