hbase-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "stack (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-10625) Remove unnecessary key compare from AbstractScannerV2.reseekTo
Date Fri, 28 Feb 2014 06:57:20 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10625?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13915510#comment-13915510
] 

stack commented on HBASE-10625:
-------------------------------

bq. Was still worth a try 

Yes

> Remove unnecessary key compare from AbstractScannerV2.reseekTo
> --------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-10625
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10625
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Lars Hofhansl
>         Attachments: 10625-0.94.txt, 10625-trunk.txt
>
>
> In reseekTo we find this
> {code}
> ...
>         compared = compareKey(reader.getComparator(), key, offset, length);
>         if (compared < 1) {
>           // If the required key is less than or equal to current key, then
>           // don't do anything.
>           return compared;
>         } else {
>            ...
>            return loadBlockAndSeekToKey(this.block, this.nextIndexedKey,
>               false, key, offset, length, false);
> ...
> {code}
> loadBlockAndSeekToKey already does the right thing when a we pass a key that sorts before
the current key. It's less efficient than this early check, but in the vast (all?) cases we
pass forward keys (as required by the reseek contract). We're optimizing the wrong thing.
> Scanning with the ExplicitColumnTracker is 20-30% faster.
> (I tested with rows of 5 short KVs selected the 2nd and or 4th column)
> I propose simply removing that check.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1.5#6160)

Mime
View raw message