Re: Scan performance

[Viral Bajaria <vi...@gmail.com>]

Hi Tony,

I know it's been a while and am not sure if you already figured out the
issue but try taking at HBASE-9079 and see if it's similar to the problem
that you are facing with FuzzyRowFilter. I have attached a patch to that
ticket too and have verified that it fixed things for me in production.

Thanks,
Viral

On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Tony Dean <To...@sas.com> wrote:

> I was able to test scan performance with 0.94.9 with around 6000 rows X 40
> columns and FuzzyRowFilter gave us 2-4 times better performance.  I was
> able to test this offline without any problems.  However, once I turned it
> on in our development cluster, we noticed that with some row keys that
> should have matched were not matching.  After reverting back to
> SingleColumnValueFilter the cases that were failing, began to work again.
>  We thought that the anomaly was due to certain data in row key, but we
> managed to create identical row keys in a different table and see the scan
> work.  So, bottom line I can't explain this behavior.  Has anyone seen this
> behavior and does anyone have debugging tips?
>
> Thanks.
>

Re: Scan performance

[Jean-Marc Spaggiari <je...@spaggiari.org>]

Should we expect same kind of performances difference with get between
addColumn(CF) and addColumn(CF, C)?

Might worse to give it a try...


2013/8/8 Viral Bajaria <vi...@gmail.com>

> Hi Tony,
>
> I know it's been a while and am not sure if you already figured out the
> issue but try taking at HBASE-9079 and see if it's similar to the problem
> that you are facing with FuzzyRowFilter. I have attached a patch to that
> ticket too and have verified that it fixed things for me in production.
>
> Thanks,
> Viral
>
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Tony Dean <To...@sas.com> wrote:
>
> > I was able to test scan performance with 0.94.9 with around 6000 rows X
> 40
> > columns and FuzzyRowFilter gave us 2-4 times better performance.  I was
> > able to test this offline without any problems.  However, once I turned
> it
> > on in our development cluster, we noticed that with some row keys that
> > should have matched were not matching.  After reverting back to
> > SingleColumnValueFilter the cases that were failing, began to work again.
> >  We thought that the anomaly was due to certain data in row key, but we
> > managed to create identical row keys in a different table and see the
> scan
> > work.  So, bottom line I can't explain this behavior.  Has anyone seen
> this
> > behavior and does anyone have debugging tips?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
>