hbase-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andrew Purtell <apurt...@apache.org>
Subject Re: HBase 0.92rc3 rest performance
Date Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:48:31 GMT
jstacks could help point out if the REST server has some internal lock or monitor contention.

Internal to the REST server is just the HBase Java client. REST uses a HTablePool to manage
a small pool of HTable instances that interact with the cluster according to the request at
hand. Client changes could show up in REST but it would be odd (and possibly a REST bug) to
see them only there.

Other things to check:

  - What version of Jetty?

  - What version of Jersey?

  - Any WARNs in logs from the REST server?

Reproducing this would be as simple as starting up 50 or so concurrent fetches?

Best regards,


      - Andy

Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via Tom White)


----- Original Message -----
> From: Jean-Daniel Cryans <jdcryans@apache.org>
> To: user@hbase.apache.org
> Cc: 
> Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 1:45 PM
> Subject: Re: HBase 0.92rc3 rest performance
> 
>T his seems to single out the REST server since thrift and native
> clients stayed the same.
> 
> Can you provide us your test so we can do testing on our side too?
> 
> Maybe doing a few jstacks on the REST server could point out the
> obvious bottlenecks.
> 
> J-D
> 
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 11:25 AM, Ben West <bwsithspawn00@yahoo.com> 
> wrote:
>>  Hi all
>> 
>>  We're trying out .92rc3 instead of .90.4, and for the most part 
> everything seems fine. But we have a simple test of REST performance which is 
> basically a large number of cURL jobs getting random rows, and this test is 
> running *a lot* slower under .92.
>> 
>>  When we run just a single client doing REST GETs, the performance is fine. 
> But once I have dozens or hundreds of clients, performance is ~20x worse than 
> under .90.4 (response time is 7-800ms instead of 40-50ms).
>> 
>>  YCSB has pretty much the same performance under both versions, as do other 
> internal tools measuring Thrift and native performance, so I don't feel like 
> this is a problem with HBase coresetup (although it could be). I don't see 
> anything suspicious in any logs, IO and CPU utilization are both low. Has anyone 
> run into this or have thoughts on how to troubleshoot?
>> 
>>  Thanks!
>>  Ben
> 

Mime
View raw message