[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-21354?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17082440#comment-17082440
]
Peter Vary commented on HIVE-21354:
-----------------------------------
[~belugabehr]: My understanding is that having a lock on a partition
automatically locks the table (even without further, table specific lock), and
having a lock on a table prevents further conflicting locks on any partition of
the given table by a different query.
This means that the extra table level lock is not only unnecessary, but it also
prevents parallelism which should be allowed. (DROP PARTITION for p1, INSERT
INTO p2)
The question is whether this code is used for legacy locks as well which might
have different logic. (Most probably not)
> Lock The Entire Table If Majority Of Partitions Are Locked
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HIVE-21354
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-21354
> Project: Hive
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: HiveServer2
> Affects Versions: 4.0.0, 3.2.0
> Reporter: David Mollitor
> Assignee: David Mollitor
> Priority: Major
>
> One of the bottlenecks of any Hive query is the ZooKeeper locking mechanism.
> When a Hive query interacts with a table which has a lot of partitions, this
> may put a lot of stress on the ZK system.
> Please add a heuristic that works like this:
> # Count the number of partitions that a query is required to lock
> # Obtain the total number of partitions in the table
> # If the number of partitions accessed by the query is greater than or equal
> to half the total number of partitions, simply create one ZNode lock at the
> table level.
> This would improve performance of many queries, but in particular, a {{select
> count(1) from table}} ... or ... {{select * from table limit 5}} where the
> table has many partitions.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
