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

Switch to Threaded View
HBase >> mail # dev >> 30% random performance in 0.95+


Copy link to this message
-
Re: 30% random performance in 0.95+
In my measurements 0.94 has been getting faster with each release in both read and write performance.
I wonder how representative PE is after all; it only tests via the local FS layer (not HDFS), among other issues.

-- Lars

----- Original Message -----
From: Jean-Marc Spaggiari <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2013 8:03 PM
Subject: Re: 30% random performance in 0.95+

I think we should do that on 0.94 as well. I don't see any good reason
to not do it.

JM

2013/6/28 lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Yep.
> Now the question is: Make these changes to 0.94 as well? Or just document these better.
>
> -- Lars
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Andrew Purtell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc:
> Sent: Friday, June 28, 2013 2:08 PM
> Subject: Re: 30% random performance in 0.95+
>
> I've been thinking about how to periodically search through some of our
> parameter space to see what changes to defaults are better all the way
> around. Probably will so something based on Bigtop.
>
>
> On Friday, June 28, 2013, lars hofhansl wrote:
>
>> And indeed just this makes a tremendous difference. Unpatched 0.94 with
>> 40% block cache configured is actually faster than 0.95 with the same block
>> cache size.
>>
>> -- Lars
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <javascript:;>>
>> To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED] <javascript:;>" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<javascript:;>
>> >
>> Cc:
>> Sent: Friday, June 28, 2013 1:34 PM
>> Subject: Re: 30% random performance in 0.95+
>>
>> Thanks JM,
>>
>> HBASE-8450 (r1485562) is interesting. It increases (among other things)
>> the block cache percentage from 24 to 40%, which would lead to a higher
>> probability of a future random read to hit an already cached block.
>>
>>
>> -- Lars
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Jean-Marc Spaggiari <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <javascript:;>>
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <javascript:;>; lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<javascript:;>
>> >
>> Cc:
>> Sent: Friday, June 28, 2013 1:18 PM
>> Subject: Re: 30% random performance in 0.95+
>>
>> I have the script done to run over a list of "svn releases", so if
>> required, just give me a bunch of them or a range and I can restart.
>> Just keep me posted.
>>
>> JM
>>
>> 2013/6/28 lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <javascript:;>>:
>> > I did a few more test (on my laptop, which is not quite representative),
>> and found only a 2-3% improvement from HBASE-8001+HBASE-8012 in the end.
>> > I'll look through the issues that you identified.
>> >
>> > -- Lars
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: Jean-Marc Spaggiari <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <javascript:;>>
>> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <javascript:;>
>> > Cc:
>> > Sent: Friday, June 28, 2013 12:51 PM
>> > Subject: Re: 30% random performance in 0.95+
>> >
>> > Sorry folks,
>> >
>> > I'm a bit late to run the tests... 0.94.8 and 0.94.9 are currently
>> > running, but here is what I have been able to capture so far for 0.95
>> > over the last year:
>> > r1357480 1513196
>> > r1367009 1440244.4
>> > r1375812 1287143.5
>> > r1381671 1287200.2
>> > r1388620 1295262.6
>> > r1394335 1022140.2
>> > r1403898 884171.9
>> > r1410631 804229.9
>> > r1419787 846816.9
>> > r1426557 853535.3
>> > r1433514 873265.1
>> > r1438972 840666.9
>> > r1446106 877432.2
>> > r1452661 883974.8
>> > r1458421 882233.3
>> > r1464267 847000.8
>> > r1478964 877433.5
>> > r1485868 744905.5
>> > r1494869 765105.9
>> >
>> > So seems that there was some improvements between r1367009 and
>> > r1403898 but they are old. Also another major improvement between
>> > r1478964 and r1485868...
>> >
>> > Let me know if you want me to dig further and I will be very happy to do
>> so.
>> >
>> > JM
>> >
>> > 2013/6/28 Stack <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <javascript:;>>:
>> >> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 10:53 AM, lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<javascript:;>>