[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-4534?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13119839#comment-13119839
 ] 

[email protected] commented on HBASE-4534:
------------------------------------------------------



bq.  On 2011-10-04 00:56:39, Lars Hofhansl wrote:
bq.  > 
src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/regionserver/StoreFileScanner.java, line 
100
bq.  > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/2155/diff/1/?file=47617#file47617line100>
bq.  >
bq.  >     On many JVMs (including hotspot) this creates a memory barrier.
bq.  >     This might actually cause a measurable slowdown on multi-core 
machines.
bq.  >     (And maybe I'm just too paranoid).
bq.  >

I could shut off these counters in production, but we already increment 
AtomicLongs all over the place to collect performance counters. So if this is a 
concern, this is probably best addressed in a separate feature. I don't yet 
know what the solution would be (some custom high-performance non-locking 
counters?) We have also added a lot of per-table/column family metrics in our 
internal branch, and that did not seem to hurt performance at all. A more 
important point, however, is that if we can cut disk IO, a small amount 
additional computation is probably OK. We are already seeing a huge reduction 
in block cache misses after pushing lazy seek to production.

Please let me know if you still want me to get rid of these increments in 
production.


- Mikhail


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/2155/#review2297
-----------------------------------------------------------


On 2011-10-03 21:59:42, Mikhail Bautin wrote:
bq.  
bq.  -----------------------------------------------------------
bq.  This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
bq.  https://reviews.apache.org/r/2155/
bq.  -----------------------------------------------------------
bq.  
bq.  (Updated 2011-10-03 21:59:42)
bq.  
bq.  
bq.  Review request for hbase.
bq.  
bq.  
bq.  Summary
bq.  -------
bq.  
bq.  A randomized unit test for Gets/Scans (all-row, single-row, multi-row, 
all-column, single-column, and multi-column). Also all combinations of Bloom 
filters and compression (NONE vs GZIP) are tested. The unit test flushes 
multiple StoreFiles with disjoint timestamp ranges and runs various types of 
queries against them. Currently we are not testing overlapping timestamp ranges.
bq.  
bq.  
bq.  This addresses bug HBASE-4534.
bq.      https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-4534
bq.  
bq.  
bq.  Diffs
bq.  -----
bq.  
bq.    src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/regionserver/StoreFileScanner.java 
3ec1962 
bq.    src/main/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/regionserver/StoreScanner.java 
ede42b2 
bq.    src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/HBaseTestingUtility.java a828846 
bq.    
src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/regionserver/TestMultiColumnScanner.java 
a0d8abf 
bq.    
src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/regionserver/TestScanWithBloomError.java 
e86c1c6 
bq.    
src/test/java/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/regionserver/TestSeekOptimizations.java 
PRE-CREATION 
bq.  
bq.  Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/2155/diff
bq.  
bq.  
bq.  Testing
bq.  -------
bq.  
bq.  Re-running the test suite. Please do not commit yet.
bq.  
bq.  
bq.  Thanks,
bq.  
bq.  Mikhail
bq.  
bq.


                
> A new unit test for lazy seek and StoreScanner in general
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-4534
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-4534
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Test
>    Affects Versions: 0.94.0
>            Reporter: Mikhail Bautin
>            Assignee: Mikhail Bautin
>
> A randomized unit test for Gets/Scans (all-row, single-row, multi-row, 
> all-column, single-column, and multi-column). Also all combinations of Bloom 
> filters and compression (NONE vs GZIP) are tested. The unit test flushes 
> multiple StoreFiles with disjoint timestamp ranges and runs various types of 
> queries against them. Currently we are not testing overlapping timestamp 
> ranges.

--
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

        

Reply via email to