Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 86037 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2010 20:28:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 22 Dec 2010 20:28:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 88071 invoked by uid 500); 22 Dec 2010 20:28:37 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-user-archive@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 88045 invoked by uid 500); 22 Dec 2010 20:28:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@hbase.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@hbase.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 88037 invoked by uid 99); 22 Dec 2010 20:28:37 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 22 Dec 2010 20:28:37 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of bradfordstephens@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.193 as permitted sender) Received: from [74.125.82.193] (HELO mail-wy0-f193.google.com) (74.125.82.193) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 22 Dec 2010 20:28:31 +0000 Received: by wyb42 with SMTP id 42so1681017wyb.8 for ; Wed, 22 Dec 2010 12:28:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:mime-version:received:in-reply-to :references:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=o1lb2Hl+TtLT43pyllFZFQSZo25lr7fCGLpzSuVfDJw=; b=drfUKV5OK/0IUsQOMWs+b6sjkttz8TqYAaDrUKEcS5yxVPkJusp6JcNiTNSx0f1WoH Dt6mU58Kv+g5lhN7LpsIzEwlCJ77XpZ1OCRFjs+/WCqDdHEgNkHDTJGW/IbhE1k+joW6 vdAKVSW7yAcBcaUM6pb9fBwKlWLQ8zAg1BPa4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=bVX0xWbbkxwz5T6P8sq6XEwveAnuPPxkuN+nCyzshnKKTBe7snsGtZw17NXXU0gdAO /lthCk2E9pwGXhKrAcH5tyyb0tBVUxmxFEub06xBXXO6AmhfAmfeC5CbBqdMTm83VIaE KpreSyMKqHVxOFCEWXwhbhDdBYjcq5KbDBIU8= Received: by 10.216.82.68 with SMTP id n46mr7992173wee.90.1293049681624; Wed, 22 Dec 2010 12:28:01 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.38.197 with HTTP; Wed, 22 Dec 2010 12:27:39 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <463596.68997.qm@web65514.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> From: Bradford Stephens Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 12:27:39 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Slow MR data load to table To: user@hbase.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Very good points, I'm thinking it's environmental as well, but I wanted to do a 'sanity check'. I don't really have any control over this cluster. Upgrading to .89 reduced the load time from 24 hours to 8, but I was expecting 2hrs based on past tests. I can live with it since it's an initial bulk import, but I want HBase to look awesome for these customers (since they have a lot of pull). Another cluster with nearly identical setup for HBase is blazing fast (for EC2). (I'm not much of a sysadmin). Cheers, B On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 11:43 AM, Stack wrote: > I took a look at your regionserver log. =A0As per your above comment, > boring. =A0More importantly, no blocking going on. > > You have 4 column families going on. =A0Do you have to have this amount > of CFs? =A0This might explain some slow down. > > If it was faster last week and this week its slow though 'nothing' has > changed, it smells environmental. > > It looks like you have hooked your Map to TOF... so you should have a > nice little write buffer in HTable going on (You might check). > > For sure, you are not swapping? =A0You have any monitoring of this > cluster going on? =A0Setting swappyness to zero from 60 is probably a > bit radical. =A0You want some swap if memory pressure. =A060 is too loose= . > =A0If you look at those killed map tasks... why they die? =A0Because > processes were killed by the kernel? > > St.Ack > > > On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 10:10 PM, Bradford Stephens > wrote: >> Unfortunately, changing swappiness didn't seem to help. >> >> On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 4:28 PM, Andrew Purtell wr= ote: >>>> Yes, a good point. Swappiness is set to 60 -- suppose I should set it = to 0? >>> >>> Yes. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> =A0 =A0- Andy >>> >>> Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. >>> =A0- Piet Hein (via Tom White) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Bradford Stephens, >> Founder, Drawn to Scale >> drawntoscalehq.com >> 727.697.7528 >> >> http://www.drawntoscalehq.com --=A0 The intuitive, cloud-scale data >> solution. Process, store, query, search, and serve all your data. >> >> http://www.roadtofailure.com -- The Fringes of Scalability, Social >> Media, and Computer Science >> > --=20 Bradford Stephens, Founder, Drawn to Scale drawntoscalehq.com 727.697.7528 http://www.drawntoscalehq.com --=A0 The intuitive, cloud-scale data solution. Process, store, query, search, and serve all your data. http://www.roadtofailure.com -- The Fringes of Scalability, Social Media, and Computer Science