for it there?
** **
Thanks,
David
** **
*From:* Keith Turner [mailto:ke...@deenlo.com]
*Sent:* Thursday, September 19, 2013 7:01 PM
*To:* user@accumulo.apache.org
*Subject:* Re: BatchWriter performance on 1.4
** **
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 5:08 PM, Slater, David M. david.sla...@jhuapl.edu
wrote
The addMutations method blocks when the client-side buffer fills up, so you
may see a lot of time spent in that method due to a bottleneck downstream.
There are a number of things you could try to speed that up. Here are a few:
1. Increase the BatchWriter's buffer size. This can smooth out the
be
nice to have a different thread handle the ingest for each BatchWriter, so I
might try that out.
From: David Medinets [mailto:david.medin...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 10:41 PM
To: accumulo-user
Subject: Re: BatchWriter performance on 1.4
Have you looked at generating
Are you aware of the multi table batch writer? I am not sure if it would
be useful, but wanted to make sure you knew about it. It will use the
same thread pool to process mutations for multiple tables. Also it will
batch mutations for multiple tablets into the same rpc calls.
On Wed, Sep 18,
for you?
Keith
** **
*From:* Keith Turner [mailto:ke...@deenlo.com]
*Sent:* Thursday, September 19, 2013 12:39 PM
*To:* user@accumulo.apache.org
*Subject:* Re: BatchWriter performance on 1.4
** **
Are you aware of the multi table batch writer? I am not sure if it would
be useful
