hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From lars hofhansl <la...@apache.org>
Subject Re: 30% random performance in 0.95+
Date Fri, 28 Jun 2013 20:13:11 GMT
I did a few more test (on my laptop, which is not quite representative), and found only a 2-3%
improvement from HBASE-8001+HBASE-8012 in the end.
I'll look through the issues that you identified.

-- Lars



----- Original Message -----
From: Jean-Marc Spaggiari <jean-marc@spaggiari.org>
To: dev@hbase.apache.org
Cc: 
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2013 12:51 PM
Subject: Re: 30% random performance in 0.95+

Sorry folks,

I'm a bit late to run the tests... 0.94.8 and 0.94.9 are currently
running, but here is what I have been able to capture so far for 0.95
over the last year:
r1357480 1513196
r1367009 1440244.4
r1375812 1287143.5
r1381671 1287200.2
r1388620 1295262.6
r1394335 1022140.2
r1403898 884171.9
r1410631 804229.9
r1419787 846816.9
r1426557 853535.3
r1433514 873265.1
r1438972 840666.9
r1446106 877432.2
r1452661 883974.8
r1458421 882233.3
r1464267 847000.8
r1478964 877433.5
r1485868 744905.5
r1494869 765105.9

So seems that there was some improvements between r1367009 and
r1403898 but they are old. Also another major improvement between
r1478964 and r1485868...

Let me know if you want me to dig further and I will be very happy to do so.

JM

2013/6/28 Stack <stack@duboce.net>:
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 10:53 AM, lars hofhansl <larsh@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> I partially tracked this down to HBASE-8001 and HBASE-8012 by looking at
>> the call stacks in a profiling session.
>> HBASE-8767 is a backport of both patched to 0.94.
>>
>
> Sounds like nice work by Raymond Liu...
> St.Ack


Mime
View raw message