[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17662?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15887592#comment-15887592
]
Anastasia Braginsky commented on HBASE-17662:
---------------------------------------------
[~anoop.hbase], I will take another look to check how we can overcome the
ClassSize.estimateBase() side effects. But can you please also take a look?
When CompactingMemStore.DEEP_OVERHEAD seems correct, it differs from
ClassSize.estimateBase()'s resolution in 8 bytes. [~anoop.hbase], you have also
spent long time dealing with the heap sizes, so your opinion is very valuable.
Thanks,
Anastasia
> Disable in-memory flush when replaying from WAL
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-17662
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17662
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Reporter: Anastasia Braginsky
> Assignee: Anastasia Braginsky
> Attachments: HBASE-17662-V02.patch, HBASE-17662-V03.patch,
> HBASE-17662-V04.patch, HBASE-17662-V05.patch, HBASE-17662-V06.patch
>
>
> When replaying the edits from WAL, the region's updateLock is not taken,
> because a single threaded action is assumed. However, the thread-safeness of
> the in-memory flush of CompactingMemStore is based on taking the region's
> updateLock.
> The in-memory flush can be skipped in the replay time (anyway everything is
> flushed to disk just after the replay). Therefore it is acceptable to just
> skip the in-memory flush action while the updates come as part of replay from
> WAL.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
