Mailing-List: contact hadoop-commits-help@lucene.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: hadoop-dev@lucene.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Apache Wiki <wikidiffs@apache.org>
To: hadoop-commits@lucene.apache.org
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2007 05:09:05 -0000
Message-ID: <20070611050905.20201.76339@eos.apache.org>
Subject: [Lucene-hadoop Wiki] Update of "Hbase/PerformanceEvaluation" by stack

Dear Wiki user,

You have subscribed to a wiki page or wiki category on "Lucene-hadoop Wiki" for change notification.

The following page has been changed by stack:
http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-hadoop/Hbase/PerformanceEvaluation

The comment on the change is:
Add initial test figures for single region server

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  = Testing HBase Performance and Scalability =
+ 
+ == Tool Description ==
  
  [https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-1476 HADOOP-1476] adds to HBase {{{src/test}}} the script {{{org.apache.hadoop.hbase.PerformanceEvaluation}}}.  It runs the tests described in ''Performance Evaluation'', Section 7 of the [http://labs.google.com/papers/bigtable.html BigTable paper].  See the citation for test descriptions.  They will not be described below. The script is useful evaluating HBase performance and how well it scales as we add region servers.
  
@@ -61, +63 @@

  $ ${HBASE_HOME}/bin/hbase ciient deleteTable TestTable
  }}}
  
- Some first figures in advance of any profiling of the current state of the HBase code (on Fri Jun 8 2007) would seem to indicate that HBase runs at about an order-of-magnitude slower than whats reported in the BigTable paper running on similiar hardware (more on this to follow).
  
+ == One Region Server on June 8th, 2007 ==
+ Here are some first figures for HBase in advance of any profiling taken June 8, 2007
+ 
+ This first test ran on a mini test cluster of four machines only: not the 1768 of the !BigTable paper.  Each node had 8G of RAM and 2x dual-core 2Ghz Opterons.  Every member ran a HDFS datanode.  One node ran the namenode and the HBase master, another the region server and a third an instance of the !PerformanceEvaluation script configured to run one client.  Clients write ~1GB of data: One million rows, each row has a single column whose value is 1000 randomly-generated bytes (See the BigTable paper for a better description).
+ 
+ 
+ ||Experiment||HBase||!BigTable||
+ ||random reads ||68||1212||
+ ||random reads (mem)||Not implemented||10811||
+ ||random writes||847||8850||
+ ||sequential reads||301||4425||
+ ||sequential writes||850||8547||
+ ||scans||3063||15385||
+ 
+ The above table lists how many 1000-byte rows read/written per second.  The !BigTable values are from '1' Tablet Server column of Figure 6 of the !BigTable paper.
+ 
+ Except for scanning, we seem to be an order of magnitude off at the moment.  Watching the region server during the write tests, it was lightly loaded.  At a minimum, there would appear to be issues with liveness/synchronization in need of fixing.
+ 
+ More to follow after more analysis.
+