You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to issues@hbase.apache.org by "Jonathan Lawlor (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2015/04/08 22:50:14 UTC

[jira] [Commented] (HBASE-10060) Unsynchronized scanning

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10060?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14485997#comment-14485997 ] 

Jonathan Lawlor commented on HBASE-10060:
-----------------------------------------

Hey [~lhofhansl] is this one the same as HBASE-13082? Should we mark this one as a duplicate of HBASE-13082?

> Unsynchronized scanning
> -----------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-10060
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-10060
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Lars Hofhansl
>            Priority: Minor
>         Attachments: 10060-trunk-v2.txt, 10060-trunk.txt
>
>
> HBASE-10015 has some lengthy discussion. The solution there ended up replacing synchronized with ReentrantLock, which - somewhat surprisingly - yielded a non-trivial improvement for tall tables.
> The goal should be to avoid locking in StoreScanner at all. StoreScanner is only accessed by a single thread *except* when we have a concurrent flush or a compaction, which is rare (we'd acquire and release the lock millions of times per second, and compact/flush a few time an hour at the most).



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)