Mailing-List: contact user-help@hbase.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: user@hbase.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of eczech52@gmail.com designates
 209.85.220.171 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAGpTDNfa1ppTOUUf3QuodODhTt8607bxKVypVHukieX8X994QQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CACjoVsJ_jm3Spa01R5iKT8G_is8+CiGnyBskpwFwC5FMsKMd-A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CADcMMgHd9gnE2KNmiOEV6twYXtB1UqiaQsgk=7J+Sjrqk9VuCQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHXxaiAUeZjMAZYvy5G7uFsw+Nrco9qwphzFncoChP6NWhbFQw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGpTDNfa1ppTOUUf3QuodODhTt8607bxKVypVHukieX8X994QQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Eric Czech <eczech52@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 11:07:14 -0500
Message-ID: 
 <CACjoVsJCe54YOnPfvePJ-65OD2P6wvXjx6Q-h-znyqMXHNKtkg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Prewarming in-memory column families
To: user@hbase.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d043c7c9088497604d6df340d

--f46d043c7c9088497604d6df340d
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Thanks guys.

I think I'll use the initial scan then but limit the rows used to a smaller
subset that I know should fit in the in-memory part of the block cache.

On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 8:16 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <jdcryans@apache.org>wrote:

> It's touchy... what if the data set doesn't fit in the in-memory's
> part of the block cache (which is 25%)? Maybe the user only wants to
> keep "in-memory" those edits that are being used? What about the IO
> hit of assigning those regions at startup that would now need to read
> X GBs all at once?
>
> FWIW I've never been a fan of that setting.
>
> J-D
>
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 5:04 PM, Sergey Shelukhin
> <sergey@hortonworks.com> wrote:
> > should we make this built-in? Sounds like default user intent for
> in-memory.
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 2:13 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 7:39 AM, Eric Czech <eczech52@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi everyone,
> >> >
> >> > Are blocks for in-memory column families automatically loaded in to
> the
> >> > block cache on restart?
> >>
> >>
> >> No
> >>
> >>
> >> >  If not, would anyone recommend running a scan with
> >> > .setCacheBlocks(true) after a restart for in-memory column families?
> >> >
> >>
> >> Yes.
> >>
> >> It should be easy verifying whether the above warmup had an effect.
> >>
> >> Good luck,
> >> St.Ack
> >>
>

--f46d043c7c9088497604d6df340d--