hbase-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Lars Hofhansl (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-6580) New HTable pool, based on HBase(byte[], HConnection, ExecutorService) constructor
Date Mon, 19 Nov 2012 00:14:58 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-6580?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13499961#comment-13499961
] 

Lars Hofhansl commented on HBASE-6580:
--------------------------------------

That would work. Ideally I'd like to get HTablePool out of the mix. It's heavy weight and
not needed (and in fact just adds overhead) if the both the connection and thread pool are
shared between HTables.
                
> New HTable pool, based on HBase(byte[], HConnection, ExecutorService) constructor
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-6580
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-6580
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>    Affects Versions: 0.92.2, 0.94.2
>            Reporter: Lars Hofhansl
>            Priority: Minor
>         Attachments: HBASE-6580_v1.patch
>
>
> Here I propose a very simple TablePool.
> It could be called LightHTablePool (or something - if you have a better name).
> Internally it would maintain an HConnection and an Executor service and each invocation
of getTable(...) would create a new HTable and close() would just close it.
> In testing I find this more light weight than HTablePool and easier to monitor in terms
of resources used.
> It would hardly be more than a few dozen lines of code.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

Mime
View raw message