Yes, its all about the block cache.  IN_MEMORY is a useful tool as
well, but be careful you can choke out other regions/tables.

-ryan

On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 12:07 AM, Abhijit Pol <[email protected]> wrote:
> @Ryan
> when you mentioned caching and lots of RAM you referred giving it to block
> cache or memstore?
>
> we have a table with two column families A and B. For column family A we
> have set "IN_MEMORY" ==> true and we have multiple 64GB ram machines where
> we would like to hold this column family in RAM for better read performance.
> A gets some writes and lots of read requests.
>
> our understanding is memstore will hold writes (and serve reads as long as
> keys are in memstore). once memstore is flushed it will be block cache that
> will give us in-memory access. If so we should be having bigger block cache
> than % given to memstore??
>
> Thanks,
> Abhi
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 9:20 PM, Ryan Rawson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Due to DFS client things are a little not as good as they should be...
>> They are being worked on, so it will get resolved in time.
>>
>> In the mean time, the key to fast access is caching... ram ram ram.
>>
>> -ryan
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 10:15 AM, Abhijit Pol <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> > We are using Hbase 0.20.5 drop with latest cloudera Hadoop distribution.
>> >
>> > - We are hitting 3 nodes Hbase cluster from a client which has 10
>> > threads each with thread local copy of HTable client object and
>> > established connection to server.
>> > - Each of 10 threads issuing 10,000 read requests of keys randomly
>> > selected from pool of 1000 keys. All keys are present on HBase and
>> > table is pinned in memory (to make sure we don't have any disk seeks).
>> > - If we run this test with 10 threads we get avg latency as seen by
>> > client = 8ms (excluding initial 10 connection setup time) . But if we
>> > increase # threads to 100, 250 to 500 we get increasing latency
>> > numbers like 26ms, 51ms, 90ms.
>> > - We have enabled HBase metrics on RS and we see "get_avg_time" on all
>> > RS between 5-15ms in all tests, consistently.
>> >
>> > Is this expected? Any tips to get consistent performance below 20ms?
>> >
>>
>

Reply via email to