Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
HBase >> mail # dev >> HBase balancer policy issue


Copy link to this message
-
Re: HBase balancer policy issue
if region A is doing compaction , load balancer ask region server to close
region A
if set hbase.hstore.close.check.interval = 0,
the region A can't be closed until the completion of compaction,
during this period, the region A can also accept mutation request?
Am I right?
Does this have bad affect on load balancer?

On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 1:25 AM, Stack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Interesting.  I suppose if the balancer remembered what it had
> recently moved and let some time elapse before it moved the recently
> moved, would that do?
> St.Ack
>
> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 11:26 PM, Anty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 11:02 AM, Stack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> If compacting, don't we interrupt it so we can close and move the
> >> region.  You are worried about the compacting work done so far -- you
> >> don't want to lose it?  So you are suggesting that a region should be
> >> able to say "No, not now!  I'm busy?" (We'd need to distingush between
> >> a balancer 'move' and a move or close for any other region).
> >>
> > Yes, that's exactly what i want to  convey.
> > Can this consideration be included in balancer?
> >
> >>
> >> St.Ack
> >>
> >> On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 7:44 PM, Anty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> > When doing balance, Can we take into account the compaction status of
> >> > regions.
> >> > Currently, even the region is doing compaction, it can also be
> >> interrupted
> >> > to response to reassign.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 12:57 AM, Schubert Zhang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Thanks, I think it is HBASE-3373
> >> >>
> >> >> On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 11:33 PM, Ted Yu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > I think your request is described in
> >> >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-3373
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Practically speaking, the scenario below can hardly occur (in
> trunk,
> >> at
> >> >> > least).
> >> >> > If the tables are created with pre-split regions, the regions would
> be
> >> >> > round-robin distributed.
> >> >> > If the tables are created with single region, subsequent write
> >> operations
> >> >> > would cause the region split. Balancer would offload young regions
> to
> >> >> other
> >> >> > servers - see HBASE-3609
> >> >> > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-3609>which is not in
> >> 0.90
> >> >> > branch.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Refer to
> >> >> >
> >>
> http://zhihongyu.blogspot.com/2011/04/load-balancer-in-hbase-090.htmlfor
> >> >> > details.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Cheers
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 12:25 AM, Schubert Zhang <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > I have a question about HBase balancer.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > In release 0.90.x, it seems the balancer only regards the number
> of
> >> >> > regions
> >> >> > > and balance these regions into every regionserver.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > If we have two tables (A and B) now, each have 100 regions.
> >> >> > > Then, a extreme situation is:
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > RegionsServer1: 100 regions, which all belong to table A
> >> >> > > RegionsServer2: 100 regions, which all belong to table B
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > If my application access table B heavy, the almost all opetations
> >> hit
> >> >> > > RegionsServer2, it is not balance.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > I have a idea about the balance policy:
> >> >> > > (1) Firstly balance for each table
> >> >> > > (2) Then, overall balance.
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > >
> >> >> > > Schubert
> >> >> > >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Best Regards
> >> > Anty Rao
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best Regards
> > Anty Rao
> >
>

--
Best Regards
Anty Rao