Mailing-List: contact user-help@hbase.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: user@hbase.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAOVwZ_Vq-U2i=YtgcBDHwM2wBwb01LNxEd33Vh7N26WR8Q0p=A@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAOVwZ_VzyK3-5xtFxAvJTosKajizw6uLLOYxkgDCyK7KDU+GVA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALte62x=L7WgsXJ_TSy-yOnhxz=y79tKdVXAtpSak7eEFL_tyQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOVwZ_Xi_uK2n55PrBoJALBDOP1b8bWzc-OezAWvVR5OA_Q=ag@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALte62xTctXjZgy992VLNVhi5F+hOorK9nvsWfoLAjPYsHohEw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOVwZ_Vq-U2i=YtgcBDHwM2wBwb01LNxEd33Vh7N26WR8Q0p=A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 13:13:44 -0700
Message-ID: 
 <CALte62w37QzbPP-rwjj5ZxpQ_Cdy0RzwzwNdBXGZfSbQLMEGaA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: processing in coprocessor and region splitting
From: Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com>
To: "user@hbase.apache.org" <user@hbase.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113e9920298caa052ee533be

--001a113e9920298caa052ee533be
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

bq. calculating another new attributes of a trade

Can you put the new attributes in separate columns ?

Cheers

On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 12:38 PM, Daniel Po=C5=82acza=C5=84ski <dpolaczansk=
i@gmail.com
> wrote:

> The data is set of trades and the processing is some kind of enrichment
> (calculating another new attributes of a trade). All attributes are neede=
d
> (the original and new)
>
> 2016-03-25 18:41 GMT+01:00 Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com>:
>
> > bq. During the processing the size of the data is doubled.
> >
> > This explains the frequent split :-)
> >
> > Is the original data needed after post-processing (maybe for auditing) =
?
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 10:32 AM, Daniel Po=C5=82acza=C5=84ski <
> > dpolaczanski@gmail.com
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > I am testing different solutions (POC).
> > > The region size currenlty is 32MB (I know it should be >=3D 1GB, but =
we
> are
> > > testing different solutions with smaller amount of the data ). So
> > > increasing region size is not a solution. Our problems can happen eve=
n
> > when
> > > a region will be 1 GB. We want to proces the data with coprocessor an=
d
> > > hadoop map reduce. I can not have one big Region because I want
> sensible
> > > degree of paralerism (with Map Reduce and coprocessors).
> > >
> > > Increasing region size + pre-splitting  is not an option as well
> because
> > I
> > > know nothing about keys(random long).
> > >
> > > During the processing the size of the data is doubled.
> > >
> > > And yes, coprocessor rewrites a lot of the data written into the tabl=
e.
> > The
> > > whole record is serialized to avro and stored in one column (storing
> > single
> > > attribute in single column we will try in the next POC)
> > >
> > > it is not a typical big data project where we can allow former analys=
is
> > of
> > > the data:)
> > >
> > > 2016-03-25 17:38 GMT+01:00 Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com>:
> > >
> > > > What's the current region size you use ?
> > > >
> > > > bq. During the processing size of the data gets increased
> > > >
> > > > Can you give us some quantitative measure as to how much increase y=
ou
> > > > observed (w.r.t. region size) ?
> > > >
> > > > bq. I was looking for some "global lock" in source code
> > > >
> > > > Probably not a good idea using global lock.
> > > >
> > > > I am curious, looks like your coprocesser may rewrite a lot of data
> > > written
> > > > into the table.
> > > > Can client side accommodate such logic so that the rewrite is
> reduced ?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 8:55 AM, Daniel Po=C5=82acza=C5=84ski <
> > > > dpolaczanski@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > > I have some processing in my coprocesserService which modifies th=
e
> > > > existing
> > > > > data in place. It iterates over every row, modifies and puts it
> back
> > to
> > > > > region. The table can be modified by only one client.
> > > > >
> > > > > During the processing size of the data gets increased -> region's
> > size
> > > > get
> > > > > increased -> region's split happens. It makes that the processing
> is
> > > > > stopped by exception NotServingRegionException (because region is
> > > closed
> > > > > and splited to two new regions so it is closed and doesn't exist
> > > > anymore).
> > > > >
> > > > > Is there any clean way to block Region's splitting?
> > > > >
> > > > > I was looking for some "global lock" in source code but I haven't
> > found
> > > > > anything helpfull.
> > > > > Another idea is to create custom RegionSplitPolicy and explicilty
> set
> > > > some
> > > > > Flag which will return false in shouldSplit(), but I'm not sure y=
et
> > if
> > > it
> > > > > is safe.
> > > > > Could you advise?
> > > > > Regards
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

--001a113e9920298caa052ee533be--