hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From lars hofhansl <la...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] The 1st hbase 0.94.17 release candidate is available for download
Date Sun, 16 Feb 2014 19:53:44 GMT
Actually the bug is in the Gaussian read test.

In generates seek keys by using a Gaussian distribution with the mean of N/2 and a sigma of
N/10 (N = number of rows used)  and using this key directly to seek into the HFile. The HFile
was seeded with keys from 0-N.

This will fail if we ever generate a key < 0, which is rare, but by no means impossible.
We need to clamp the min and max values to 0 and 2*N, resp.


-- Lars



________________________________
 From: Jean-Marc Spaggiari <jean-marc@spaggiari.org>
To: dev <dev@hbase.apache.org>; lars hofhansl <larsh@apache.org> 
Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2014 10:59 AM
Subject: Re: [VOTE] The 1st hbase 0.94.17 release candidate is available for download
 


Running fully dist with Hadoop 1.2.1. Retried with 0.94.16 and got the same exception from
time to time. So I don't think this will impact the release of 0.94.17. When my PE base line
will be done, I will try the same with 0.96 + Hadoop 2.2.0 and see if I get the same exception.




2014-02-16 13:15 GMT-05:00 lars hofhansl <larsh@apache.org>:

Hmm... Do you see this in 0.94.17 only (but not in 0.94.16 or earlier)?
>Are you running in local mode or with a real HDFS?
>
>
>-- Lars
>
>----- Original Message -----
>
>From: Jean-Marc Spaggiari <jean-marc@spaggiari.org>
>To: dev <dev@hbase.apache.org>
>
>Cc:
>Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2014 5:29 AM
>Subject: Re: [VOTE] The 1st hbase 0.94.17 release candidate is available for download
>
>
>+1 to keep the default behavior. It's very nice to have to option to start
>more than one thread but I think for 0.94 we should keep default config.
>But also, it's not a big thing. So I will be only -0 for this in the RC. I
>agree that it's a bit surprising the see the 3 servers, but not that
>dramatic.
>
>Also I'm getting this once in a while when doing HFilePerformanceEvaluation:
>
>org.apache.hadoop.hbase.io.hfile.AbstractHFileReader$NotSeekedException:
>Not seeked to a key/value
>    at
>org.apache.hadoop.hbase.io.hfile.AbstractHFileReader$Scanner.assertSeeked(AbstractHFileReader.java:320)
>    at
>org.apache.hadoop.hbase.io.hfile.HFileReaderV2$ScannerV2.next(HFileReaderV2.java:690)
>    at
>org.apache.hadoop.hbase.HFilePerformanceEvaluation$GaussianRandomReadBenchmark.doRow(HFilePerformanceEvaluation.java:347)
>    at
>org.apache.hadoop.hbase.HFilePerformanceEvaluation$RowOrientedBenchmark.run(HFilePerformanceEvaluation.java:169)
>    at
>org.apache.hadoop.hbase.HFilePerformanceEvaluation.runBenchmark(HFilePerformanceEvaluation.java:121)
>    at
>org.apache.hadoop.hbase.HFilePerformanceEvaluation$3.run(HFilePerformanceEvaluation.java:97)
>    at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:744)
>
>Occured 30% of the time, and only on GaussianRandomReadBenchmark.
>
>JM
>
>
>
>2014-02-16 2:32 GMT-05:00 Andrew Purtell <apurtell@apache.org>:
>
>> On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 9:18 PM, lars hofhansl <larsh@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> > Actually looks like this was by design in HBASE-10340/HBASE-9892.
>> > It spawns three local region server threads in local mode now, still just
>> > one process.
>> >
>> > I now think it's OK. What do other folks think? Should we set the default
>> > back to 1?
>> >
>>
>> I think unannounced things that violate the principle of least surprise are
>> bad. We should sink the RC and set the default back IMO.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>>
>>    - Andy
>>
>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
>> (via Tom White)
>>
>
>
Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message