[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-18500?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16115550#comment-16115550
]
stack commented on HBASE-18500:
-------------------------------
+1 on the removals. They have done a proper deprecation cycle. This change
should be marked incompatible though if only to have it show up in list of
possibly breaking changes when someone searches.
bq. We should check the results in order to find the failed PUTs, but the
change breaks the operational compatibility...
How you mean [~chia7712] (BTW, nice summary of benefits regards removal of BM
from HT)?
What if we created a BM in side in Puts and called its flush... then operation
would be as it was before?
Thanks.
> Performance issue: Don't use BufferedMutator for HTable's put method
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-18500
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-18500
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Guanghao Zhang
> Assignee: Guanghao Zhang
> Attachments: HBASE-18500-v1.patch, HBASE-18500-v2.patch
>
>
> Copied the test result from HBASE-17994.
> Run start-hbase.sh in my local computer and use the default config to test
> with PE tool.
> {code}
> ./bin/hbase org.apache.hadoop.hbase.PerformanceEvaluation --rows=100000
> --nomapred --autoFlush=True randomWrite 1
> ./bin/hbase org.apache.hadoop.hbase.PerformanceEvaluation --rows=100000
> --nomapred --autoFlush=True asyncRandomWrite 1
> {code}
> Mean latency test result.
> || || Test1 || Test2 || Test3 || Test4 || Test5 ||
> | randomWrite | 164.39 | 161.22 | 164.78 | 140.61 | 151.69 |
> | asyncRandomWrite | 122.29 | 125.58 | 122.23 | 113.18 | 123.02 |
> 50th latency test result.
> || || Test1 || Test2 || Test3 || Test4 || Test5 ||
> | randomWrite | 130.00 | 125.00 | 123.00 | 112.00 | 121.00 |
> | asyncRandomWrite | 95.00 | 97.00 | 95.00 | 88.00 | 95.00 |
> 99th latency test result.
> || || Test1 || Test2 || Test3 || Test4 || Test5 ||
> | randomWrite | 600.00 | 600.00 | 650.00 | 404.00 | 425.00 |
> | asyncRandomWrite | 339.00 | 327.00 | 297.00 | 311.00 | 318.00 |
> In our internal 0.98 branch, the PE test result shows the async write has the
> almost same latency with the blocking write. But for master branch, the
> result shows the async write has better latency than the blocking client.
> Take a look about the code, I thought the difference is the BufferedMutator.
> For master branch, HTable don't have a write buffer and all write request
> will be flushed directly. And user can use BufferedMutator when user want to
> perform client-side buffering of writes. For the performance issue
> (autoFlush=True), I thought we can use rpc caller directly in HTable's put
> method. Thanks.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
