Mailing-List: contact dev-help@hbase.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@hbase.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CALte62xPEtWsooq=GkJdGJ29=M3GU3AKtqEOC0YDzV9iHnGobg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJL+TUTk-XFuXFg8rJQ7VeS0pYPoWmu4Bowau_NBu73N8d2xJg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALte62xPEtWsooq=GkJdGJ29=M3GU3AKtqEOC0YDzV9iHnGobg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Lars George <lars.george@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 20:43:50 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJL+TUR07qFcJw8NjSPD8NYNWpcoKUm8mnpK4WLRFKga+ChSjQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: hbase:meta blocks in L1?
To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <dev@hbase.apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
archived-at: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 18:43:57 -0000

Ah wait, this was fixed in
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-15467, but is not right
(if I read this proper) in the 1.x line. It could mean that hbase:meta
is cached in L2 only.

On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 7:37 PM, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com> wrote:
> Looking at FSTableDescriptors#createMetaTableDescriptor() , both column
> families have the following:
>
>                 .setCacheDataInL1(true),
>
> Is there something else you were looking for ?
>
> Cheers
>
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 6:59 AM, Lars George <lars.george@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hey,
>>
>> HBASE-11364 did add `.setCacheDataInL1(true)`, but the later change to
>> use `HTableDescriptor.metaTableDescriptor()` changes the layout of the
>> `hbase:meta` to omit the L1 cache setting. Is this on purpose or an
>> oversight?
>>
>> In other words, are the meta blocks currently never cached in L1?
>>
>> Lars
>>