[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-14791?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15004957#comment-15004957
]
Alex Araujo commented on HBASE-14791:
-------------------------------------
Thanks for reviewing [~lhofhansl]]! Changing HTable to HTableInterface does not
break compatibility for subclasses of TableOutputFormat because HTable is
private. Subclassing HTable instead of using delegation would save a fair
amount of boilerplate in BufferedHTable, and allow both Mutation types to share
the same buffer (addresses the ordering issue).
I'll upload a v2 that subclasses HTable and preserves ordering.
> [0.98] CopyTable is extremely slow when moving delete markers
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-14791
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-14791
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Bug
> Affects Versions: 0.98.16
> Reporter: Lars Hofhansl
> Assignee: Alex Araujo
> Attachments: HBASE-14791-0.98-v1.patch
>
>
> We found that some of our copy table job run for many hours, even when there
> isn't that much data to copy.
> [~vik.karma] did his magic and found that the issue is with copying delete
> markers (we use raw mode to also move deletes across).
> Looking at the code in 0.98 it's immediately obvious that deletes (unlike
> puts) are not batched and hence sent to the other side one by one, causing a
> network RTT for each delete marker.
> Looks like in trunk it's doing the right thing (using BufferedMutators for
> all mutations in TableOutputFormat). So likely only a 0.98 (and 1.0, 1.1,
> 1.2?) issue.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
