[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5539?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13275887#comment-13275887
]
Benoit Sigoure commented on HBASE-5539:
---------------------------------------
Yeah I have preliminary results at http://goo.gl/mZAcK – it shows that
asynchbase can be quite a bit faster than {{HTable}}, surprisingly perhaps
especially for read-heavy workloads, as well as for write-heavy workloads with
many threads, where {{HTable}} suffers from really poor concurrency.
BTW, asynchbase 1.3.0 has been released, so the patch I attached originally to
this issue needs to be updated to change the dependency to be on that version.
I'll post a new patch soon, unless someone beats me to it.
> asynchbase PerformanceEvaluation
> --------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-5539
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5539
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: performance
> Reporter: Benoit Sigoure
> Assignee: Benoit Sigoure
> Priority: Minor
> Labels: benchmark
> Attachments: 0001-asynchbase-PerformanceEvaluation.patch
>
>
> I plugged [asynchbase|https://github.com/stumbleupon/asynchbase] into
> {{PerformanceEvaluation}}. This enables testing asynchbase from
> {{PerformanceEvaluation}} and comparing its performance to {{HTable}}. Also
> asynchbase doesn't come with any benchmark, so it was good that I was able to
> plug it into {{PerformanceEvaluation}} relatively easily.
> I am in the processing of collecting results on a dev cluster running 0.92.1
> and will publish them once they're ready.
--
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
