Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
HBase >> mail # dev >> Re: small perf degradation in 0.94 trunk vs. older versions


Copy link to this message
-
Re: small perf degradation in 0.94 trunk vs. older versions
Thanks N!
(I didn't know it was so easy to reproduce)

________________________________
 From: Nicolas Liochon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 8:01 AM
Subject: Re: small perf degradation in 0.94 trunk vs. older versions
 
Here are some tests on a standalone hbase. I just create a table with 3000
regions from the shell: create 't1', 'f1', {NUMREGIONS => 3000, SPLITALGO
=> 'HexStringSplit'}

It seems that's it's between august 20th and september 1st, but there could
be some small other stuff along the line as well...

commit eb36a3e410998e72d76edcc5c181dfa54bba1c39
Date:   Tue Oct 2 20:39:14 2012 +0000
0 row(s) in 184.4040 seconds
0 row(s) in 191.4830 seconds
0 row(s) in 189.6370 seconds
0 row(s) in 198.9080 seconds
0 row(s) in 202.8180 seconds

commit 8c93fcfca2eb12162b99b8e1e327bab872bba6b7
Date:   Wed May 30 17:06:52 2012 +0000
create 't1', 'f1', {NUMREGIONS => 3000, SPLITALGO => 'HexStringSplit'}
0 row(s) in 165.2160 seconds
0 row(s) in 142.7890 seconds
0 row(s) in 137.7260 seconds

commit 01f0b3c77ea30b1c22a0e96929e97bb9f5faab2bgit
Date:   Thu Jul 19 22:19:49 2012 +0000
0 row(s) in 173.9160 seconds
0 row(s) in 155.0360 seconds
0 row(s) in 141.5210 seconds
0 row(s) in 140.6480 seconds

commit bc51a7267d2647630224f646b62b80458591414a
Date:   Sat Sep 1 04:35:29 2012 +0000
0 row(s) in 161.1990 seconds
0 row(s) in 171.0010 seconds
0 row(s) in 167.2430 seconds
0 row(s) in 189.9960 seconds
0 row(s) in 205.0460 seconds
0 row(s) in 194.4270 seconds
0 row(s) in 191.9020 seconds

commit 5ea73b7992819ec6e24ba7c2c5beee306f7d12da
Date:   Thu Aug 9 21:52:21 2012 +0000
0 row(s) in 164.1430 seconds
0 row(s) in 154.3410 seconds
0 row(s) in 154.3370 seconds
0 row(s) in 142.6060 seconds
0 row(s) in 138.8110 seconds
0 row(s) in 144.4190 seconds

commit 7179970b4a00ce630004d72e8e45e30fa9f4881b
Date:   Mon Aug 20 23:38:50 2012 +0000
0 row(s) in 146.4550 seconds
0 row(s) in 150.3020 seconds
0 row(s) in 143.6050 seconds
0 row(s) in 148.4000 seconds
0 row(s) in 164.8320 seconds

commit b4e5c3ae45935a37e1ab8651998c6a8131180eec
Date:   Mon Aug 13 19:32:19 2012 +0000
0 row(s) in 151.0200 seconds
0 row(s) in 186.2860 seconds
0 row(s) in 141.6130 seconds
0 row(s) in 141.1880 seconds
0 row(s) in 140.9320 seconds
0 row(s) in 162.9540 seconds
0 row(s) in 139.5530 seconds
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 10:07 AM, Nicolas Liochon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I'm going to try with some random commits. Hopefully I will reproduce it a
> on standalone instance as well...
> Stay tuned :-)
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 11:02 PM, lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
>> Did a quick scan through the changes committed since 0.94.1:
>> HBASE-6608
>> HBASE-6364
>> HBASE-6587
>> HBASE-6537
>> HBASE-6713
>> HBASE-6438
>> HBASE-6299
>> HBASE-7018
>> HBASE-7038
>> HBASE-7060
>>
>> Any chance you can do this again with 0.94.2 (or even do a binary search
>> through the commits to pinpoint the change)?
>>
>> -- Lars
>>
>>   ------------------------------
>> *From:* Nicolas Liochon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> *To:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]; lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 27, 2012 10:42 AM
>> *Subject:* Re: small perf degradation in 0.94 trunk vs. older versions
>>
>> It was Version 0.94.3, r38dbd22c99debd9010e9e5f4fbabeeaf3c4e1ddd
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 7:41 PM, lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>>
>> Interesting. Thanks N.
>>
>> I'll look through the 0.94 commits since 0.94.1 to see what's causing
>> this.
>> With 0.94 trunk you mean the 0.94.3RC?
>>
>>
>> -- Lars
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>  From: Nicolas Liochon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2012 5:07 AM
>> Subject: small perf degradation in 0.94 trunk vs. older versions
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On a create table / reassignment, I feel we lost some performances
>> recently
>> on 0.94. It's not huge (5% to 10%), but I would prefer them to be the
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB