Mailing-List: contact user-help@hbase.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: user@hbase.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of gcjhhu-hbase-user@m.gmane.org
 designates 80.91.229.12 as permitted sender)
To: user@hbase.apache.org
From: Stan Barton <stanislav.barton@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: question about region assignment
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 13:32:30 +0000 (UTC)
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <loom.20110408T152756-160@post.gmane.org>
References: <AANLkTikS55rf3+vRb+4a2RpbUd4NhurQ=uoJ4qPF=mhM@mail.gmail.com>
 <AANLkTinbJ2shA4uyvP0ce8rfwQ8VTG4OA9H1_6cEiE1=@mail.gmail.com>
 <AANLkTikahjb=ejW5SmGuwgYbaNEb-9PEqTKCkCWu6J_J@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
User-Agent: Loom/3.14 (http://gmane.org/)

Jack Levin <magnito@...> writes:

> 
> I am on 0.89-830
> 
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:44 AM, Ted Yu <yuzhihong@...> wrote:
> > Are you using 0.90.1 (where regions are randomly distributed across cluser)
> > ?
> > I logged HBASE-3373 but was told it is specific to our usage.
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:39 AM, Jack Levin <magnito@...> wrote:
> >
> >> Hello, we have this one table what about 12 regions, that is super hot
> >> with writes, for some reason most of the regions were assigned to a
> >> single server, which cause it to flush and compact every 10 minutes,
> >> causing suboptimal performance.  We do use random row_keys, so I don't
> >> see how sorted ROWs can land on single region anyway, the issue was
> >> that each region was assigned to the same region server, is there a
> >> way to mitigate the issue?  I closed closing the regions manually, but
> >> they went right back to the same server, finally I shutdown RS
> >> process, and that table's regions went in random places around the
> >> cluster, but still its puzzling, anyone had issues like that?
> >>
> >> -Jack
> >>
> >
> 
> 

hello,

I am encountering the same problem with 0.90.1. All the created regions (via
inserting puts via java api) are assigned to a single region server. What is
interesting is that the load balancing works, since the number of regions is
changing on all regionservers - some 'old' regions on the highly loaded
regionserver are being re-assigned to other regionservers. I guess this is a
bug, since the system is sort of unusable like this.

Stan