hbase-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jean-Marc Spaggiari <jean-m...@spaggiari.org>
Subject Re: Timestamp as a key good practice?
Date Tue, 26 Jun 2012 19:04:10 GMT
Thanks JD. I will shut down one of the ZK instance.

To Michael and JD,I will start another thread regarding the
performances with more details.

JM

2012/6/26, Michael Segel <michael_segel@hotmail.com>:
>> Network is always good to check, it's all fun and games until an
>> interface negotiates 100Mb.
>>
>> 50ms per get sounds a bit extreme.
> <mini-rant>
> Funny you should mention hardware.
> I did submit a talk on cluster design to Strata (NY and London) Seems it
> didn't make the cut on NY, but who knows about London...
>
> It seems that people are now starting to get the idea that its important to
> think about your hardware and cluster design before you actually start to
> build a cluster.
> </mini-rant>
>
> You're right we don't know enough about the hardware and configuration to
> talk intelligently...
>
> Depending on the size of the row... it could cause a long time to do a
> single fetch. (err get() )
>
> On Jun 26, 2012, at 1:12 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 10:56 AM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari
>> <jean-marc@spaggiari.org> wrote:
>>> Am I better to run it on 1? Or on 3? I just want to do some testing
>>> for now. but for ZK, can I keep it in only one server for now? Or it will
>>> be
>>> more efficient if  Iconfigure it on 3?
>>
>> FWIW your system will be as available is PC1 is, so just put 1 ZK on
>> that node. ZK is not on the read path so whether you have 1 or 10 it
>> won't change anything.
>>
>>> But I have issues with the performances. It's taking 20
>>> seconds to do 1000 gets with the actual configuration... I'm tracking
>>> the issues. I think the network is one so I will address it this week,
>>>
>>
>> Network is always good to check, it's all fun and games until an
>> interface negotiates 100Mb.
>>
>> 50ms per get sounds a bit extreme.
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> JM
>>>
>>> 2012/6/26, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jdcryans@apache.org>:
>>>> A quorum with 2 members is worse than 1 so don't put a ZK on PC2, the
>>>> exception you are seeing is that ZK is trying to get a quorum on with
>>>> 1 machine but that doesn't make sense so instead it should revert to a
>>>> standalone server and still work.
>>>>
>>>> J-D
>>
>
>

Mime
View raw message