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 >> Unscientific comparison of fully-cached zipfian reading


Copy link to this message
-
Re: Unscientific comparison of fully-cached zipfian reading
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 10:36 AM, lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The 2000-4000 was just glancing at the HMaster page every now and then.

Ah sorry to have focused on that.

> The main point I was trying to make is that the only difference is the
> number of block cache misses (which is low in the SequentialRead case and
> very high in the RandomRead case), and the number of cache misses is almost
> the same as the number of a requests.

Re-reading your email, it seems we tested different things. In my
case, whatever cache I was hitting was the only one I was planning to
hit. If I was reading from the OS cache, I was disabling the block
cache.

> (The cache misses are traced via OpenTSDB).
>
> I'll repeat my test with a single region server only. Was your test in a
> cluster or with a single region server?

The whole setup is described in the document.

J-D
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