hbase-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Andrew Purtell (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-17959) Canary timeout should be configurable on a per-table basis
Date Tue, 16 May 2017 20:13:04 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17959?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16013039#comment-16013039
] 

Andrew Purtell commented on HBASE-17959:
----------------------------------------

Or just use a ConcurrentHashMap? Still not really necessary, just synchronize access to the
map?
{code}
+    private Map<String, AtomicLong> perTableReadWriteLatency = new HashMap<>();
{code}

This logging is unusual
{code}
+                LOG.error("-perTable Timeout: Read/Write operation for " + tableName + "
took " + actual +
+                    " ms, which is longer than configured timeout of " + configured + " ms.");
{code}
Since you are printing the configured value anyway, just mention the actual and configured
values in a unified message format. Easier to parse. I don't like the '-perTable' thing, FWIW

Otherwise lgtm

> Canary timeout should be configurable on a per-table basis
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-17959
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-17959
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: canary
>            Reporter: Andrew Purtell
>            Assignee: Chinmay Kulkarni
>            Priority: Minor
>         Attachments: HBASE-17959.patch
>
>
> The Canary read and write timeouts should be configurable on a per-table basis, for cases
where different tables have different latency SLAs. 



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

Mime
View raw message