Ram,

Yes, each column family in the 4 c/f table has only one column qualifier.

Will try addColumn(byte[] fam, byte[] qual) and test how that performs.

Don't have another version of hbase to test across releases, but will see
if I can manage this.

In test case to scan only rowkeys, are you saying we still need to use
addColumnFamily to limit scan to 1 c/f? Here is the code for that test,
should addColumnFamily (or addColumn??) be used here, or it will read all
column families?

return new Scan(startInclusive, endExclusive) .setFilter(new
FilterList(FilterList.Operator.MUST_PASS_ALL, new KeyOnlyFilter(true), new
FirstKeyOnlyFilter()) ) .setCaching(caching) .setCacheBlocks(false);

Thanks.



On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 1:15 PM, Partha <[email protected]> wrote:

> Will send across table statement and the test code. Pls let me know if you
> find anything from your test given the inputs so far. Note that column
> family has only 1 qualifier with json payload value of size 15KB. The
> column families use fastdiff encoding and gzip compression.
>
> Added user@ to this reply.
>
> Thanks
>
> On Aug 21, 2017 12:47 PM, "ramkrishna vasudevan" <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Ya . Just send replies to user@. Generally using replyAll would have
>> done that.
>>
>> Regarding the test case - I will try to create a simple test case and see
>> what is happening. Though I tried out one it seemed things are working as
>> expected.
>>
>> Looks like something obvious is missing here. Can you send across the
>> test case or the test program including how the tables are created?
>>
>> Regards
>> Ram
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 10:13 PM, Partha <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Not intentional :-) Just haven't figured out how to post to public
>>> thread, just send replies to [email protected]?
>>>
>>> Thought this was a simple test case, to read 1MM rows on each table
>>> (limiting 2nd table to 1 cf). Any suggestion to make it simpler?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>>
>>> On Aug 21, 2017 12:38 PM, "ramkrishna vasudevan" <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Thanks for the info. I just noticed that you have not included user@.
>>> Was it intentional? People generally don't like side tracking a
>>> conversation.
>>> How ever I am happy to help you with this issue.
>>>
>>> Have you tried creating some simple test cases and checked out how it
>>> performs?
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Ram
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 10:02 PM, Partha <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 1.1.2.2.6.0.3-8
>>>>
>>>> On Aug 21, 2017 12:40 AM, "ramkrishna vasudevan" <
>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Which version of HBase do you use ?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Aug 20, 2017 at 4:34 AM, Partha <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Ramkrishna,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Correct. The scan on 2nd table targets a single column family (using
>>>>>> addFamily), the first table has only one c/f so not using addFamily 
>>>>>> there.
>>>>>> The column family in each case has 1 qualifier and json value of 
>>>>>> comparable
>>>>>> size.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I did not check the cache hit ratio yet on either scan, but I did do
>>>>>> a major compaction on both tables and the tests after didn't show any
>>>>>> change in test results.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>

Reply via email to