[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-19290?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16263760#comment-16263760
 ] 

binlijin commented on HBASE-19290:
----------------------------------

{quote}
The patch is adding throttling, so it's certainly changing the way things work. 
It's also adding the 'if' condition controlling throttling, so the choice is 
definitely being made by you.
I suspect you are using grabbedTask=0 as a proxy for 'failed to grab task' and 
wait on it. But when grabbedTask =1, and we still keep failing to grab tasks, 
there is no throttling for that case! Hopefully that makes my question clearer?
{quote}
But when grabbedTask =1, and we still keep failing to grab tasks, it will end 
the for loop and enter while (seq_start == taskReadySeq.get()) {} loop,  do 
this have any problem? 

> Reduce zk request when doing split log
> --------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-19290
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-19290
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: binlijin
>            Assignee: binlijin
>         Attachments: HBASE-19290.master.001.patch, 
> HBASE-19290.master.002.patch, HBASE-19290.master.003.patch, 
> HBASE-19290.master.004.patch
>
>
> We observe once the cluster has 1000+ nodes and when hundreds of nodes abort 
> and doing split log, the split is very very slow, and we find the 
> regionserver and master wait on the zookeeper response, so we need to reduce 
> zookeeper request and pressure for big cluster.
> (1) Reduce request to rsZNode, every time calculateAvailableSplitters will 
> get rsZNode's children from zookeeper, when cluster is huge, this is heavy. 
> This patch reduce the request. 
> (2) When the regionserver has max split tasks running, it may still trying to 
> grab task and issue zookeeper request, we should sleep and wait until we can 
> grab tasks again.  



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

Reply via email to