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-12148) Remove TimeRangeTracker as point of contention when many threads writing a Store
Date Mon, 06 Oct 2014 18:09:35 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-12148?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14160601#comment-14160601
] 

stack commented on HBASE-12148:
-------------------------------

bq. Your reasoning is that minimumTimestamp will only get smaller and maximumTimestamp only
bigger... 

Yes.

bq. I think you cannot get around declaring minimumTimestamp and maximumTimestamp volatile,
that will add some of the overhead back in.

Let me just add it back if any question at all around correctness (reading, JVM does not have
to atomic access on 64bit though in practice seems to work).  I did not test in context but
using atomic long its about 10-15% slower to complete.  Hopefully this not enough to make
it a hotspot.  Can't check just now.

> Remove TimeRangeTracker as point of contention when many threads writing a Store
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-12148
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-12148
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Sub-task
>          Components: Performance
>    Affects Versions: 2.0.0, 0.99.1
>            Reporter: stack
>            Assignee: stack
>             Fix For: 2.0.0, 0.98.7, 0.99.1
>
>         Attachments: 12148.txt, 12148.txt, 12148v2.txt, 12148v2.txt, Screen Shot 2014-10-01
at 3.39.46 PM.png, Screen Shot 2014-10-01 at 3.41.07 PM.png
>
>




--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Mime
View raw message