hbase-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Khaled Elmeleegy <kd...@hotmail.com>
Subject HBase read performance
Date Thu, 02 Oct 2014 07:12:23 GMT

I am trying to do a scatter/gather on hbase (, where I have a client reading ~1000
keys from an HBase table. These keys happen to fall on the same region server. For my reads
I use reverse scan to read each key as I want the key prior to a specific time stamp (time
stamps are stored in reverse order). I don't believe gets can accomplish that, right? so I
use scan, with caching set to 1.

I use 2000 reader threads in the client and on HBase, I've set hbase.regionserver.handler.count
to 1500. With this setup, my scatter gather is very slow and can take up to 10s in total.
Timing an individual getScanner(..) call on the client side, it can easily take few hundreds
of ms. I also got the following metrics from the region server in question:

"queueCallTime_mean" : 2.190855525775637,
"queueCallTime_median" : 0.0,
"queueCallTime_75th_percentile" : 0.0,
"queueCallTime_95th_percentile" : 1.0,
"queueCallTime_99th_percentile" : 556.9799999999818,

"processCallTime_min" : 0,
"processCallTime_max" : 12755,
"processCallTime_mean" : 105.64873440912682,
"processCallTime_median" : 0.0,
"processCallTime_75th_percentile" : 2.0,
"processCallTime_95th_percentile" : 7917.95,
"processCallTime_99th_percentile" : 8876.89,

: 89,
: 11300,
: 654.4949739797315,
: 101.0,
: 101.0,
: 101.0,
: 113.0,

Where "delta" is the name of the table I am querying.

In addition to all this, i monitored the hardware resources (CPU, disk, and network) of both
the client and the region server and nothing seems anywhere near saturation. So I am puzzled
by what's going on and where this time is going.

Few things to note based on the above measurements: both medians of IPC processCallTime and queueCallTime
are basically zero (ms I presume, right?). However, scanNext_median is 101 (ms too, right?).
I am not sure how this adds up. Also, even though the 101 figure seems outrageously high and
I don't know why, still all these scans should be happening in parallel, so the overall call
should finish fast, given that no hardware resource is contended, right? but this is not what's
happening, so I have to be missing something(s). 

So, any help is appreciated there.


View raw message