Hi, Jingcheng You postpone compaction until your test completes by setting number of blocking stores to 120. That is kind of cheating :) As I said previously, in a long run, compaction rules the world - not number of wal files. In a real production setting, the existing write performance is more than adequate (avg load per RS usually less than 1MB/sec). Multiwal has probably its value if someone need to load quick large volume of data, but ... why do not use bulk load instead?
Thank for letting us know that beefy servers with 8 SSDs can sustain such a huge load. -Vlad On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 10:30 PM, Jingcheng Du <[email protected]> wrote: > More information for the test. > I use ycsb 0.3.0 for the test. > The command line is "./ycsb load hbase-10 -P ../workloads/workload -threads > 200 -p columnfamily=family -p clientbuffering=true -s > workload.dat" > The workload is, the data size is slightly less than 1TB: > fieldcount=5 > fieldlength=200 > recordcount=1000000000 > maxexecutiontime=86400 > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://apache-hbase.679495.n3.nabble.com/Multiwal-performance-with-HBase-1-x-tp4074403p4074731.html > Sent from the HBase User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >
