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 75BDD200C3D for ; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 06:35:52 +0100 (CET) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 7466F160B6C; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 05:35:52 +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 BEDBB160B60 for ; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 06:35:51 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 91334 invoked by uid 500); 28 Feb 2017 05:35:51 -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 91319 invoked by uid 99); 28 Feb 2017 05:35:50 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd4-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 05:35:50 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd4-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd4-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 8742CC12C9 for ; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 05:35:50 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd4-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.347 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.347 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.999, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.652] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd4-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.11]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gj-UBn4btij9 for ; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 05:35:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org (mailrelay1-us-west.apache.org [209.188.14.139]) by mx1-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-eu.apache.org) with ESMTP id 2FF485F5F7 for ; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 05:35:49 +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 6C959E0A34 for ; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 05:35:46 +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 3960624144 for ; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 05:35:46 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 05:35:46 +0000 (UTC) From: "Kahlil Oppenheimer (JIRA)" To: issues@hbase.apache.org Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Subject: [jira] [Updated] (HBASE-17706) TableSkewCostFunction improperly computes max skew MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 archived-at: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 05:35:52 -0000 [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17706?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Kahlil Oppenheimer updated HBASE-17706: --------------------------------------- Status: Patch Available (was: Open) > TableSkewCostFunction improperly computes max skew > -------------------------------------------------- > > Key: HBASE-17706 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17706 > Project: HBase > Issue Type: Bug > Components: Balancer > Affects Versions: 1.2.0 > Environment: CentOS Derivative with a derivative of the 3.18.43 kernel. HBase on CDH5.9.0 with some patches. HDFS CDH 5.9.0 with no patches. > Reporter: Kahlil Oppenheimer > Priority: Minor > Labels: patch > Attachments: HBASE-17706.patch > > > We noticed while running unit tests that the TableSkewCostFunction computed cost did not change as the balancer ran and simulated moves across the cluster. After investigating, we found that this happened in particular when the cluster started out with at least one table very strongly skewed. > We noticed that the TableSkewCostFunction depends on a field of the BaseLoadBalancer.Cluster class called numMaxRegionsPerTable, but this field is not properly maintained as regionMoves are simulated for the cluster. The field only ever increases as the maximum number of regions per table increases, but it does not decrease as the maximum number per table goes down. > This patch corrects that behavior so that the field is accurately maintained, and thus the TableSkewCostFunction produces a more correct value as the balancer runs. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.15#6346)