[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5898?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13485313#comment-13485313
]
Lars Hofhansl commented on HBASE-5898:
--------------------------------------
Sounds like a missed notify or a deadlock.
Although looking at the code I do not see how that can happen. The use of
notify (vs. notifyAll) seems correct in IdLock since all waiting threads wait
for the same condition and only one thread will be able to proceed.
@Ram: Which version of HBase?
> Consider double-checked locking for block cache lock
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-5898
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5898
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Performance
> Affects Versions: 0.94.1
> Reporter: Todd Lipcon
> Assignee: Todd Lipcon
> Priority: Critical
> Fix For: 0.94.3, 0.96.0
>
> Attachments: 5898-TestBlocksRead.txt, HBASE-5898-0.patch,
> HBASE-5898-1.patch, hbase-5898.txt
>
>
> Running a workload with a high query rate against a dataset that fits in
> cache, I saw a lot of CPU being used in IdLock.getLockEntry, being called by
> HFileReaderV2.readBlock. Even though it was all cache hits, it was wasting a
> lot of CPU doing lock management here. I wrote a quick patch to switch to a
> double-checked locking and it improved throughput substantially for this
> workload.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
