[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-16890?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15632400#comment-15632400
]
ramkrishna.s.vasudevan commented on HBASE-16890:
------------------------------------------------
bq.AsyncFSWAL with ram's patch test hang, can not finish
Which patch did you take!!!
I can try with 1 thread not sure why it hanged. In my tests my patch performed
better with 100 threads. Ya there is no network latency at all in our set up.
Everything runs in the same machine. So we get much better thro put (ops/sec
with WALPE). In your set up DN and NN are in different machine?
But there is more to it. Hang on.
I tried testing with One node real cluster with PE tool. Loaded 40G of data
with 50 threads and each row having 50 cols.
FSHLog
{code}
Min: 524525ms Max: 546482ms Avg: 540959ms
{code}
AsycnWAL with Ram's patch
{code}
Min: 992706ms Max: 1010504ms Avg: 1006560ms
{code}
With Duo's patch
{code}
Min: 992568ms Max: 1020693ms Avg: 1016597ms
{code}
So as I said earlier and as Duo mentions is it not worth to test in single node
machines?
> Analyze the performance of AsyncWAL and fix the same
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-16890
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-16890
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: wal
> Affects Versions: 2.0.0
> Reporter: ramkrishna.s.vasudevan
> Assignee: ramkrishna.s.vasudevan
> Fix For: 2.0.0
>
> Attachments: AsyncWAL_disruptor.patch, AsyncWAL_disruptor_1
> (2).patch, AsyncWAL_disruptor_3.patch, AsyncWAL_disruptor_3.patch,
> AsyncWAL_disruptor_4.patch, HBASE-16890-remove-contention-v1.patch,
> HBASE-16890-remove-contention.patch, Screen Shot 2016-10-25 at 7.34.47
> PM.png, Screen Shot 2016-10-25 at 7.39.07 PM.png, Screen Shot 2016-10-25 at
> 7.39.48 PM.png, async.svg, classic.svg, contention.png,
> contention_defaultWAL.png
>
>
> Tests reveal that AsyncWAL under load in single node cluster performs slower
> than the Default WAL. This task is to analyze and see if we could fix it.
> See some discussions in the tail of JIRA HBASE-15536.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
