hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: HBaseAdmin.flush()
Date Fri, 15 Oct 2010 02:05:07 GMT
J-D:
If you can briefly point out the code in 0.89 which makes using WAL more
reliable, that would be great.

Thanks

On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 5:51 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jdcryans@apache.org>wrote:

> Even if HBaseAdmin.flush is made synchronous, that won't get you far
> since it's still processed sequentially on the region servers. A
> better well-known option is to set hbase.regionserver.hlog.blocksize
> to a small number, and if you want high durability you could set that
> to 1KB (basically rolling at every new insert). Since this is
> incredibly inefficient, a more wide-spread number (and one we used
> while we were on 0.20) is 2MB. Set it higher if you have a high insert
> rate, or lower if you don't insert very often.
>
> J-D
>
> On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 8:36 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com> wrote:
> > We're still using 0.20.6 :-)
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 5:19 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jdcryans@apache.org
> >wrote:
> >
> >> If your Puts are using the WAL, and you are on 0.89, it's already as
> >> durable as it can be without forcing flushes.
> >>
> >> J-D
> >>
> >> On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 8:07 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >> > HBaseAdmin.flush() is asynchronous.
> >> > In order to achieve high durability, do I have a better choice ?
> >> >
> >> > Thanks
> >> >
> >>
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message