junegunn commented on PR #8485: URL: https://github.com/apache/hbase/pull/8485#issuecomment-5210212427
You're right, thanks for looking into it. Reverting just the `StoreScanner` line so the filter is present in both cases: | rows | unfiltered, lazy | filtered, lazy (unpatched) | filtered, eager (patched) | patch cost | |---|---|---|---|---| | 2 | 15 | 29 | 35 | 6 | | 3 | 22 | 43 | 49 | 6 | | 6 | 43 | 85 | 91 | 6 | | 9 | 64 | 127 | 133 | 6 | That puts us back where we were before: a fixed cost bounded by the store file count, paid once per scanner open. And since any scan this patch affects already has a filter, it is already paying the per-row overhead, so the flat 6 is a small share of the total: around 20% at 2 rows, under 5% at 9, shrinking from there. +1 from me. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
