Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-hbase-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 14C78955A for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2012 02:16:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 59482 invoked by uid 500); 22 Feb 2012 02:16:35 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-dev-archive@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 59435 invoked by uid 500); 22 Feb 2012 02:16:35 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@hbase.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@hbase.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 59425 invoked by uid 99); 22 Feb 2012 02:16:35 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 22 Feb 2012 02:16:35 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of saint.ack@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.169 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.214.169] (HELO mail-tul01m020-f169.google.com) (209.85.214.169) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 22 Feb 2012 02:16:27 +0000 Received: by obbta7 with SMTP id ta7so12737372obb.14 for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2012 18:16:06 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of saint.ack@gmail.com designates 10.182.12.74 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.182.12.74; Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of saint.ack@gmail.com designates 10.182.12.74 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=saint.ack@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=saint.ack@gmail.com Received: from mr.google.com ([10.182.12.74]) by 10.182.12.74 with SMTP id w10mr16530414obb.51.1329876966600 (num_hops = 1); Tue, 21 Feb 2012 18:16:06 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=iBq/SXbwUrP5INJQf5zjiG4VU4/EnXnSsx46WQf1PuU=; b=ZQbrXzr2x2WtByhQuhaP/qeZWUPe79Qtx7sdxmdv+1JKmmd1qUOSEbQTN63AETZq5D YJIXhRFPud900sS4OWTenO9+oqOIEF6ZmCVuP49IcdWss4WvH2QHAh6HksCMCWhCM/sk H2srok+HYaju5BxGWvvje7T1tpMO285DZijE8= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.12.74 with SMTP id w10mr14093839obb.51.1329876966549; Tue, 21 Feb 2012 18:16:06 -0800 (PST) Sender: saint.ack@gmail.com Received: by 10.182.122.66 with HTTP; Tue, 21 Feb 2012 18:16:06 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 18:16:06 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: Z8C6eXhAqiI1N-dmln9S5ln7T6E Message-ID: Subject: Re: Scan performance on a big table as combination of multiple logic tables From: Stack To: dev@hbase.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Tue, Feb 21, 2012 at 5:44 PM, M. C. Srivas wrote: > With no impact on Java GC going nuts? =A0FB reported (a few months ago) i= t > was bad to run a region-server > with -Xmx larger than 15G or 16G. Unless its no longer true, wouldn't tha= t > be limiting factor for how > large one should make regions? > We don't bring the total region into memory Srivas (Is that what you are thinking?). The FB recommendation of > 15G heaps was probably the old adage around big heaps taking a long time to sweep when GCing? Good on you, St.Ack