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 8C25E200C10 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2017 02:22:30 +0100 (CET) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 8ACBD160B57; Fri, 20 Jan 2017 01:22:30 +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 DAC8E160B54 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2017 02:22:29 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 26039 invoked by uid 500); 20 Jan 2017 01:22:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact issues-help@hbase.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list issues@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 26028 invoked by uid 99); 20 Jan 2017 01:22:28 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd2-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 20 Jan 2017 01:22:28 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd2-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd2-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 9D7C61A007C for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2017 01:22:28 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd2-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.199 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.199 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[KAM_ASCII_DIVIDERS=0.8, KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY=1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.999] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-lw-us.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd2-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NzjU7qHLtthu for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2017 01:22:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org (mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org [209.188.14.139]) by mx1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTP id 9B2C15F477 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2017 01:22:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jira-lw-us.apache.org (unknown [207.244.88.139]) by mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 28E1AE008E for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2017 01:22:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jira-lw-us.apache.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jira-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at jira-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTP id DB10325286 for ; Fri, 20 Jan 2017 01:22:26 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2017 01:22:26 +0000 (UTC) From: "Ted Yu (JIRA)" To: issues@hbase.apache.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Subject: [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-17462) Investigate using sliding window for read/write request costs in StochasticLoadBalancer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 archived-at: Fri, 20 Jan 2017 01:22:30 -0000 [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17462?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15830977#comment-15830977 ] Ted Yu commented on HBASE-17462: -------------------------------- Did different colors represent different regions ? How do you interpret the (lower) request counts readings after the change ? Thanks > Investigate using sliding window for read/write request costs in StochasticLoadBalancer > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: HBASE-17462 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17462 > Project: HBase > Issue Type: Improvement > Reporter: Ted Yu > Assignee: Tim Brown > Labels: patch > Attachments: after_changes.png, before_changes.png, HBASE-17462.patch > > > In the thread, http://search-hadoop.com/m/HBase/YGbbyUZKXWALkX1, Timothy was asking whether the read/write request costs in StochasticLoadBalancer should be calculated as rates. > This makes sense since read / write load on region server tends to fluctuate over time. Using sliding window would reflect more recent trend in read / write load. > Some factors to consider: > The data structure used by StochasticLoadBalancer should be concise. The > number of regions in a cluster can be expected to approach 1 million. We > cannot afford to store long history of read / write requests in master. > Efficiency of cost calculation should be high - there're many cost > functions the balancer goes through, it is expected for each cost function > to return quickly. Otherwise we would not come up with proper region > movement plan(s) in time. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)