hbase-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Nick Dimiduk (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-11550) Custom value for BUCKET_CACHE_BUCKETS_KEY should be sorted
Date Fri, 15 Aug 2014 21:59:20 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-11550?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14099232#comment-14099232

Nick Dimiduk commented on HBASE-11550:

[~stack] Trivial is fine. I think it's important that the semantics of the allocator placement
policy be identical, but the change itself is trivial. I didn't communicate my shift in opinion
after researching allocation strategies. I believe Ted's point about roundUpToBucketSizeInfo
is quite valid, makes it clear that this allocator implementation does indeed depend on the
order of target sizes.

I don't think it fair to the new contributor to have their contributions get caught up in
the project politicking. I'm happy to help see a valuable patch through, even if the circumstances
around it are not ideal.

More, valid tests are better than less. I don't know what the new issue's test might look
like. For a cache of configured size and shape, for given sequence of blocks, they're placed
such that they all fit, something like this? I'm much more interested in thinking through
what constitutes a "better" or "worse" criteria for HBase and if there's a different allocation
strategy that fits HBase access patterns "better".

This looks like a decent starting point http://www.memorymanagement.org/mmref/index.html

> Custom value for BUCKET_CACHE_BUCKETS_KEY should be sorted
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: HBASE-11550
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-11550
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 0.99.0, 0.98.4, 0.98.5
>            Reporter: Ted Yu
>            Assignee: Gustavo Anatoly
>            Priority: Trivial
>             Fix For: 0.99.0, 2.0.0, 0.98.6
>         Attachments: HBASE-11550-v1.patch, HBASE-11550-v2.patch, HBASE-11550-v3.patch,
HBASE-11550-v4-0.98.patch, HBASE-11550-v4.patch, HBASE-11550.patch
> User can pass bucket sizes through "hbase.bucketcache.bucket.sizes" config entry.
> The sizes are supposed to be in increasing order. Validation should be added in CacheConfig#getL2().

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

View raw message