hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stack <st...@duboce.net>
Subject Re: hbase-5945
Date Tue, 08 Jan 2013 07:32:04 GMT
Hey boss.  Put some comments up on the issue.  Maybe write up more in the
issue a high-level on where you would like to drive the issue.  As you say,
there is overlap with hbase-6521 it seems.  The doc linked to on the latter
issue suggests rpc is preamble, header, then the protobuf Message (with
optional encoded data block of KeyValues).  Ditto for the response.
 Looking at 5945 this seems to be where you are going to?

Good on you DD,

On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Devaraj Das <ddas@hortonworks.com> wrote:

> Hey Stack, Todd, and others, any chance you guys could take a quick
> look at the last patch on hbase-5495. Although the patch is not
> complete (and deserves a good cleanup and double-checks on whether it
> killed all the buffer copies), it probably gives a good idea on the
> overall direction. The RPC.proto is some thing that one could start
> with, and then drill deeper into the other areas. I have only tried to
> minimize the copies for the request/response bodies. The copy for the
> header bits would probably be noise and the current patch doesn't try
> to reduce copies for those..
> 5945 is related to 6521 (versioning), but I think 5945 is already an
> improvement over what exists and if folks agree, I could spend some
> extra time to get it in shape sooner (within a day or two)..
> Thanks,
> Devaraj.

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