You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to issues@hbase.apache.org by "Andrew Purtell (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2013/12/02 08:25:39 UTC

[jira] [Updated] (HBASE-9969) Improve KeyValueHeap using loser tree

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-9969?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Andrew Purtell updated HBASE-9969:
----------------------------------

    Fix Version/s:     (was: 0.98.0)
                   0.98.1

> Improve KeyValueHeap using loser tree
> -------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HBASE-9969
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-9969
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Performance, regionserver
>            Reporter: Chao Shi
>            Assignee: Chao Shi
>             Fix For: 0.96.1, 0.98.1
>
>         Attachments: 9969-0.94.txt, KeyValueHeapBenchmark_v1.ods, KeyValueHeapBenchmark_v2.ods, hbase-9969-pq-v1.patch, hbase-9969-pq-v2.patch, hbase-9969-v2.patch, hbase-9969-v3.patch, hbase-9969.patch, hbase-9969.patch, kvheap-benchmark.png, kvheap-benchmark.txt
>
>
> LoserTree is the better data structure than binary heap. It saves half of the comparisons on each next(), though the time complexity is on O(logN).
> Currently A scan or get will go through two KeyValueHeaps, one is merging KVs read from multiple HFiles in a single store, the other is merging results from multiple stores. This patch should improve the both cases whenever CPU is the bottleneck (e.g. scan with filter over cached blocks, HBASE-9811).
> All of the optimization work is done in KeyValueHeap and does not change its public interfaces. The new code looks more cleaner and simpler to understand.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1#6144)