[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17215?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15951178#comment-15951178
]
huaxiang sun commented on HBASE-17215:
--------------------------------------
{quote}
Please carefully check and confirm whether this is caused by pressure on
Namenode, and if so the change here might worsen it (more requests in parallel,
although not that much). And good luck(smile).
{quote}
Thanks [~carp84] for the great advice. We checked the name node, its workload
is not heavy. Still investigating why it takes 120 ms to delete one file as
tracelog seems to tell us it should be much faster.
Thanks for the patch! We will apply this patch and HBASE-17854 to see how much
is improved.
> Separate small/large file delete threads in HFileCleaner to accelerate
> archived hfile cleanup speed
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-17215
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17215
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Yu Li
> Assignee: Yu Li
> Attachments: HBASE-17215.patch, HBASE-17215.v2.patch,
> HBASE-17215.v3.patch
>
>
> When using PCIe-SSD the flush speed will be really quick, and although we
> have per CF flush, we still have the
> {{hbase.regionserver.optionalcacheflushinterval}} setting and some other
> mechanism to avoid data kept in memory for too long to flush small hfiles. In
> our online environment we found the single thread cleaner kept cleaning
> earlier flushed small files while large files got no chance, which caused
> disk full then many other problems.
> Deleting hfiles in parallel with too many threads will also increase the
> workload of namenode, so here we propose to separate large/small hfile
> cleaner threads just like we do for compaction, and it turned out to work
> well in our cluster.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
