java -d64 version works well in the shell. 2014-09-15 11:59 GMT+08:00 牛兆捷 <[email protected]>:
> I use hbase-0.98-5-hadoop2 and modify the default heap size of region > server in hbase-env.sh as below (keep all the other parameters in the file > default): > > export HBASE_REGIONSERVER_OPTS="-Xmn200m > -XX:CMSInitiatingOccupancyFraction=70 -Xms1024m -Xmx8000m" > > The error occurs when I start hbase cluster: > > 10.1.255.246: Invalid maximum heap size: -Xmx8000m > 10.1.255.246: The specified size exceeds the maximum representable size. > 10.1.255.246: Could not create the Java virtual machine. > > The jvm I use is 64 bit : > > java version "1.6.0_39" > Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.6.0_39-b04) > Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 20.14-b01, mixed mode) > > Why 8G setting exceeds the maximum representable size. > > 2014-09-15 11:39 GMT+08:00 Nick Dimiduk <[email protected]>: > >> The scripts automate use of the tool PerformanceEvaluation that ships with >> HBase, so in that way it runs against a cluster directly. It depends on >> having independent configuration directories set up for each test >> config. There's probably too much custom-to-my-environment stuff in there, >> but I hope I included enough diffs that you can work it out in your >> deployment. Let me know if you have any more questions. >> >> -n >> >> On Sunday, September 14, 2014, 牛兆捷 <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Hi, Nick >> > >> > Can your perf_blockcache performance testing script can be applied to >> hbase >> > cluster directly? >> > If not, what kind of things should I take care? >> > >> > 2014-08-22 7:06 GMT+08:00 Nick Dimiduk <[email protected] >> <javascript:;> >> > >: >> > >> > > I'm familiar with Stack's work too, but thanks for pointing it out :) >> > > >> > > On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 8:19 PM, 牛兆捷 <[email protected] >> <javascript:;>> >> > wrote: >> > > >> > > > Hi Nick: >> > > > >> > > > Yes, I am interested in it. I will try first. >> > > > >> > > > Btw, this site (http://people.apache.org/~stack/bc/) also does the >> > > similar >> > > > performance evaluation. >> > > > You can have a look if you are interested in. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > 2014-08-21 1:48 GMT+08:00 Nick Dimiduk <[email protected] >> > <javascript:;>>: >> > > > >> > > > > Hi Zhaojie, >> > > > > >> > > > > I'm responsible for this particular bit of work. One thing to >> note in >> > > > these >> > > > > experiments is that I did not control explicitly for OS caching. I >> > ran >> > > > > "warmup" workloads before collecting measurements, but because the >> > > amount >> > > > > of RAM on the machine is fixed, it's impact of OS cache is >> different >> > > with >> > > > > different based on the amount of memory used by HBase. Another, as >> > Todd >> > > > > pointed out on an earlier thread, is that my trend lines are >> probably >> > > > > optimistic/misleading. >> > > > > >> > > > > Something I was driving for was to understand how well the >> different >> > > > > implementations before as they're managing more and more memory. >> I'd >> > > like >> > > > > to get some insight into how we might be able to take advantage of >> > > 100's >> > > > or >> > > > > even 1000's of GB of memory when the time comes. That's part of >> why >> > > > there's >> > > > > so many variables. >> > > > > >> > > > > I scripted out the running of the tests, all of my configurations >> are >> > > > > available in the associated github repo [0], and all of the data >> > points >> > > > are >> > > > > available as a csv. If you're interested in experimenting >> yourself, >> > > > please >> > > > > let me know how I can help. >> > > > > >> > > > > Cheers, >> > > > > Nick >> > > > > >> > > > > [0]: https://github.com/ndimiduk/perf_blockcache >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 6:00 AM, 牛兆捷 <[email protected] >> > <javascript:;>> wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > the complete blog link is: >> > > > > > http://zh.hortonworks.com/blog/blockcache-showdown-hbase/ >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > 2014-08-20 11:41 GMT+08:00 牛兆捷 <[email protected] >> <javascript:;> >> > >: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Hi all: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I saw some interesting results from Hortonworks blog (block >> cache >> > > > > > > < >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> http://zh.hortonworks.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/perfeval_blockcache_v2.pdf >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > ). >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > In this result, the ratio of memory footprint to database >> size is >> > > > held >> > > > > > > fixed while >> > > > > > > the absolute values are increased. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > In my mind, the performance should becomes worse for larger >> ratio >> > > as >> > > > > the >> > > > > > > increase >> > > > > > > of the absolute value. For example BucketCache#(tmpfs), the >> > > > difference >> > > > > > > between ratio (DB"1.5":"RAM"1.0) and ratio (DB"4.5":"RAM"1.0) >> > > becomes >> > > > > > > larger as the increase of memory. >> > > > > > > Actually, the result of ratio ( DB"1.5":"RAM"1.0) increase >> > > linearly, >> > > > > and >> > > > > > > the result of ratio (DB"1.5":"RAM"1.0) exponentially. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > However, for BucketCache#(heap) and LruBlockCache, the result >> is >> > > out >> > > > of >> > > > > > my >> > > > > > > expectation. >> > > > > > > The curves of ratio (DB"1.5":"RAM"1.0) and ratio >> > (DB"4.5":"RAM"1.0) >> > > > > both >> > > > > > > increase exponentially, but the relative differences as the >> > > increase >> > > > of >> > > > > > > memory are not consistent. >> > > > > > > Take LruBlockCache as an example, the difference of ratio >> > > > > > > (DB"1.5":"RAM"1.0) and ratio (DB"4.5":"RAM"1.0) becomes >> smaller >> > > from >> > > > 20 >> > > > > > GB >> > > > > > > to 50 GB, but becomes larger from 50 GB to 60 GB. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > How to analysis the cause of this result, any ideas? >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > -- >> > > > > > > *Regards,* >> > > > > > > *Zhaojie* >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > -- >> > > > > > *Regards,* >> > > > > > *Zhaojie* >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > -- >> > > > *Regards,* >> > > > *Zhaojie* >> > > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > *Regards,* >> > *Zhaojie* >> > >> > > > > -- > *Regards,* > *Zhaojie* > > -- *Regards,* *Zhaojie*
