Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4E7E200C1C for ; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 23:47:50 +0100 (CET) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id D3669160B5E; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 22:47:50 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 24365160B4D for ; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 23:47:49 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 88361 invoked by uid 500); 15 Feb 2017 22:47:49 -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 88348 invoked by uid 99); 15 Feb 2017 22:47:48 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd3-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 22:47:48 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd3-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd3-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id E1B12186132 for ; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 22:47:47 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd3-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.898 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=2, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd3-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=siftscience.com Received: from mx1-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd3-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.10]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EM1SJGnhDRuC for ; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 22:47:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wr0-f169.google.com (mail-wr0-f169.google.com [209.85.128.169]) by mx1-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-eu.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 8442E5F4AC for ; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 22:47:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wr0-f169.google.com with SMTP id z61so375425wrc.1 for ; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 14:47:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=siftscience.com; s=google; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=UWqVxYpa8Hl53q8CXS57Dwg5BIBA8aV5f+gJh3O9yS4=; b=bVkvyDNLMEQXV9DRyKh44fewUB3qHYy0KRdqam3a6Eol1CVIup22n0/GJLW/1nZC58 dPW91fpiXX+3K7Bq1aN09Yn2qXF5tAzkrrdFrVurDldW0RHaQbfZHxZj7cmWxKbSyeR3 5gqWXdgBqbXvM6s4hgIl7ft80CoC+e3Q22mt4= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=UWqVxYpa8Hl53q8CXS57Dwg5BIBA8aV5f+gJh3O9yS4=; b=enVHryLjzSe1iLRd9QUQi2qrsDxnNJHO4QDKycU2irIf5E33Bqv9oRxMqqrwWfOn8o bh+TvPelBMrMnwb4zAkNPzhqeTUZbAQkKLE1VOBlSBat4eSF7LAAphSSzIiaRKr2CSlD Wv6TK6MX+bpFACA6JT23gndw/D1W9LThHJiR69fDFHA5aeIsluYcPZ/JybQFBK+xKJH+ HDNCBn6eA3ob5dcqmxsmvDbnw7yKc72zfdgdsci6HduSj/qNRQQrQj+Bq9vETrmRVDrr wbyTVwc7lnPhqiKRpPSOCpBaF/Dj1Len/JAMwPB0I6FFpq/QpEOWuY22xKvJOetIqvR+ mrNw== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39nVXAwVgPSdJAYQ1/hZW0UJh8bdlUVdCfE8KvE/3CGlB+EhZ8KrxuSrl4DH9O++KoUWoQ3Jd5CXjV+PWcKe X-Received: by 10.223.160.180 with SMTP id m49mr32493719wrm.160.1487198864160; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 14:47:44 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.28.227.195 with HTTP; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 14:47:43 -0800 (PST) From: Timothy Brown Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 14:47:43 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Possible bookkeeping error in BaseLoadBalancer To: dev@hbase.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c18d2840272f80548997830 archived-at: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 22:47:51 -0000 --94eb2c18d2840272f80548997830 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi, I was wondering if someone could confirm or deny my suspicion that the "numMaxRegionsPerTable" is not being updated properly at line 670 of BaseLoadBalancer.java . The comment says "check whether this caused maxRegionsPerTable in the new Server to be updated" but then does not update numMaxRegionsPerTable. I stepped through 'testRegionAvailabilityWithRegionMoves' in TestBaseLoadBalancer.java and saw the maxRegionsPerTable never gets increased to 2 after the region is moved to a RegionServer that already has a region. If the maxRegionsPerTable isn't updated with the new max, then the balancer will properly penalize this potential move which causes a worse Table Skew. Code in question: //check whether this caused maxRegionsPerTable in the new Server to be updated if (numRegionsPerServerPerTable[newServer][tableIndex] > numMaxRegionsPerTable[tableIndex]) { numMaxRegionsPerTable[tableIndex] = numRegionsPerServerPerTable[newServer][tableIndex]; } Thanks, Tim --94eb2c18d2840272f80548997830--