[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-4524?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13118603#comment-13118603
]
Ming Ma commented on HBASE-4524:
--------------------------------
Agree on the "remove ROOT" suggestion for the current scale. I had this
question when fixing HBASE-4455, why do we need such redirection in the current
scale?
Does anyone know if 1M regions is a realistic scenario any time soon? 1M
regions implies 10K RSs if we have 100 regions per RS. That is a really large
scale HBase cluster.
Also, is there a chance we will put lot more meta data for each region to
.META. table, thus we don't need 1M regions to make .META. table large? If we
somehow need to put 100K bytes for each region in .META. table, we just need
100K regions to make .META. table reach 10GB.
> support for more than one region in .META. table
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-4524
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-4524
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Ming Ma
> Assignee: Ming Ma
>
> It seems there are some assumptions in the code that .META. table only has
> one region FIRST_META_REGIONINFO in the following areas:
> 1) .META. table update with user region info.
> 2) .META. regions assignment.
> 3) .META. table split handling.
> Perhaps we don't have such requirement until we scale to really large number
> of regions like 1M.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
