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

Switch to Plain View
HBase, mail # dev - Performances Tests


+
Jean-Marc Spaggiari 2013-03-08, 13:58
+
ramkrishna vasudevan 2013-03-08, 14:05
+
Andrew Purtell 2013-03-09, 03:30
+
Jean-Marc Spaggiari 2013-03-13, 00:41
Copy link to this message
-
Re: Performances Tests
Enis Söztutar 2013-03-13, 02:43
> I just finished to run all the PerformanceEvaluation tests on a
dedicated computer with all 0.9x.x HBase versions, and I found results
interesting.
Can you please provide your numbers if you can. What is interesting from
your findings?

Enis

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 5:41 PM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> If you run only 1 client with PerformanceEvaluation, it's not running
> it over MapReduce, so you don't have this overhead. But you can still
> run it if you want to have something more distributed. Might be useful
> to have the 2 options. But at the end, LoadTestTool or
> PerformanceEvaluation, any of the 2 is good as long as we are adding
> those tests.
>
> I just finished to run all the PerformanceEvaluation tests on a
> dedicated computer with all 0.9x.x HBase versions, and I found results
> interesting. That gives us a good baseline to see if new HBase
> improvements are really improving performances.
>
> JM
>
> 2013/3/8 Andrew Purtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Tangentally: I think I prefer LoadTestTool over PerformanceEvaluation, it
> > doesn't depend on nor is influenced by MapReduce job startup.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 10:05 PM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> @JM
> >> I agree with you.  Mainly the perf improvement changes needs some
> >> testcases.
> >> But sometimes the scenario on which the perf improvments happens are bit
> >> difficult to generate and we will be able to do in a standalone case
> only.
> >>  May be overall if we need to get that perf improvment result we need a
> >> real cluster with suitable data.  That is what i have experienced.  Just
> >> telling.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> Ram
> >>
> >> On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 7:28 PM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari <
> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > In HBase we already have PerformanceEvaluation which gives us a good
> >> > way to validate that nothing broke HBase speed in the recent updates.
> >> >
> >> > I can see in the JIRAs many improvements coming, like for the lazy
> >> > seeks, the bloom filters, etc. however, there is no tests for those
> >> > improvements.
> >> >
> >> > Will it not be good to ask people to add some new tests in
> >> > PerformanceEvaluation when they are introducing an improvement which
> >> > is not covered there?
> >> >
> >> > We should not touch existing tests because we need to have a way to
> >> > compare the baseline between the different versions, but we can still
> >> > add some new. Like in addition to RandomSeekScanTest we can add
> >> > RandomSeekScanBloomEnabledTest and so on. And even better if we can
> >> > back port those new tests to previous version.
> >> >
> >> > The same way we add a test class when we introduce a new feature,
> >> > should we add a performance test method to test it too?
> >> >
> >> > JM
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> >
> >    - Andy
> >
> > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
> > (via Tom White)
>
+
Jean-Marc Spaggiari 2013-03-17, 02:03
+
lars hofhansl 2013-03-17, 03:23
+
Andrew Purtell 2013-03-17, 10:55
+
Jean-Marc Spaggiari 2013-03-17, 16:47
+
Andrew Purtell 2013-03-17, 17:28
+
lars hofhansl 2013-03-17, 20:19
+
lars hofhansl 2013-03-17, 20:30
+
Ted Yu 2013-03-17, 02:17
+
Jonathan Hsieh 2013-03-19, 18:59
+
Jean-Marc Spaggiari 2013-03-20, 12:02
+
Ted Yu 2013-03-20, 16:08
+
Jean-Marc Spaggiari 2013-03-20, 18:44
+
Enis Söztutar 2013-03-20, 21:29