You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@hbase.apache.org by Stack <st...@duboce.net> on 2014/08/08 22:18:55 UTC
Re: blockcache 101
Here is a follow up to Nick's blockcache 101 that compares a number of
deploys x loadings and makes recommendation: https://blogs.apache.org/hbase/
St.Ack
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 9:22 PM, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> Nick:
>
> + You measure 99th percentile. Did you take measure of average/mean
> response times doing your blockcache comparison? (Our LarsHofhansl had it
> that that on average reads out of bucket cache were a good bit slower). Or
> is this a TODO?
> + We should just remove slabcache because bucket cache is consistently
> better and why have two means of doing same thing? Or, do you need more
> proof bucketcache subsumes slabcache?
>
> Thanks boss,
> St.Ack
>
>
Re: blockcache 101
Posted by Nick Dimiduk <nd...@gmail.com>.
Nice work!
On Friday, August 8, 2014, Stack <st...@duboce.net> wrote:
> Here is a follow up to Nick's blockcache 101 that compares a number of
> deploys x loadings and makes recommendation:
> https://blogs.apache.org/hbase/
> St.Ack
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 9:22 PM, Stack <stack@duboce.net <javascript:;>>
> wrote:
>
> > Nick:
> >
> > + You measure 99th percentile. Did you take measure of average/mean
> > response times doing your blockcache comparison? (Our LarsHofhansl had
> it
> > that that on average reads out of bucket cache were a good bit slower).
> Or
> > is this a TODO?
> > + We should just remove slabcache because bucket cache is consistently
> > better and why have two means of doing same thing? Or, do you need more
> > proof bucketcache subsumes slabcache?
> >
> > Thanks boss,
> > St.Ack
> >
> >
>