[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-18500?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16115706#comment-16115706 ]
Chia-Ping Tsai commented on HBASE-18500: ---------------------------------------- bq. How you mean It is better to make the behavior of Table#put consistent with Table#delete. What that means is we should remove the succeed PUTs from list. The broken compatibility is caused by that we did not modify the input list before. Personally, i prefer removed the succeed PUTs because that make Table#put more easier to exercise. We had good discussion in HBASE-13271. > 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)