[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-4365?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13209621#comment-13209621
 ] 

stack commented on HBASE-4365:
------------------------------

Chatting w/ J-D, probably less disruptive if we do square of the count of 
regions on a regionserver so we get to max size faster (then there'll be less 
regions created overall by this phenomeon).

                
> Add a decent heuristic for region size
> --------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-4365
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-4365
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>    Affects Versions: 0.94.0
>            Reporter: Todd Lipcon
>         Attachments: 4365.txt
>
>
> A few of us were brainstorming this morning about what the default region 
> size should be. There were a few general points made:
> - in some ways it's better to be too-large than too-small, since you can 
> always split a table further, but you can't merge regions currently
> - with HFile v2 and multithreaded compactions there are fewer reasons to 
> avoid very-large regions (10GB+)
> - for small tables you may want a small region size just so you can 
> distribute load better across a cluster
> - for big tables, multi-GB is probably best

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

        

Reply via email to