HBASE-10074 consolidate and improve capacity/sizing documentation
git-svn-id: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/hbase/trunk@1547928 13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68
This commit is contained in:
sershe
parent
fbcb4b23e2
commit
a4045ddcb8
|
|
@ -1676,41 +1676,49 @@ rs.close();
|
|||
</programlisting>
|
||||
For a description of what HBase files look like when written to HDFS, see <xref linkend="trouble.namenode.hbase.objects"/>.
|
||||
</para>
|
||||
|
||||
<section xml:id="arch.regions.size">
|
||||
<title>Region Size</title>
|
||||
|
||||
<para>Determining the "right" region size can be tricky, and there are a few factors
|
||||
to consider:</para>
|
||||
|
||||
<itemizedlist>
|
||||
<listitem>
|
||||
<para>HBase scales by having regions across many servers. Thus if
|
||||
you have 2 regions for 16GB data, on a 20 node machine your data
|
||||
will be concentrated on just a few machines - nearly the entire
|
||||
cluster will be idle. This really cant be stressed enough, since a
|
||||
common problem is loading 200MB data into HBase then wondering why
|
||||
your awesome 10 node cluster isn't doing anything.</para>
|
||||
</listitem>
|
||||
|
||||
<listitem>
|
||||
<para>On the other hand, high region count has been known to make things slow.
|
||||
This is getting better with each release of HBase, but it is probably better to have
|
||||
700 regions than 3000 for the same amount of data.</para>
|
||||
</listitem>
|
||||
|
||||
<listitem>
|
||||
<para>There is not much memory footprint difference between 1 region
|
||||
and 10 in terms of indexes, etc, held by the RegionServer.</para>
|
||||
</listitem>
|
||||
</itemizedlist>
|
||||
|
||||
<para>When starting off, it's probably best to stick to the default region-size, perhaps going
|
||||
smaller for hot tables (or manually split hot regions to spread the load over
|
||||
the cluster), or go with larger region sizes if your cell sizes tend to be
|
||||
largish (100k and up).</para>
|
||||
<para>See <xref linkend="bigger.regions"/> for more information on configuration.
|
||||
<para> In general, HBase is designed to run with a small (20-200) number of relatively large (5-20Gb) regions per server. The considerations for this are as follows:</para>
|
||||
<section xml:id="too_many_regions">
|
||||
<title>Why cannot I have too many regions?</title>
|
||||
<para>
|
||||
Typically you want to keep your region count low on HBase for numerous reasons.
|
||||
Usually right around 100 regions per RegionServer has yielded the best results.
|
||||
Here are some of the reasons below for keeping region count low:
|
||||
<orderedlist>
|
||||
<listitem><para>
|
||||
MSLAB requires 2mb per memstore (that's 2mb per family per region).
|
||||
1000 regions that have 2 families each is 3.9GB of heap used, and it's not even storing data yet. NB: the 2MB value is configurable.
|
||||
</para></listitem>
|
||||
<listitem><para>If you fill all the regions at somewhat the same rate, the global memory usage makes it that it forces tiny
|
||||
flushes when you have too many regions which in turn generates compactions.
|
||||
Rewriting the same data tens of times is the last thing you want.
|
||||
An example is filling 1000 regions (with one family) equally and let's consider a lower bound for global memstore
|
||||
usage of 5GB (the region server would have a big heap).
|
||||
Once it reaches 5GB it will force flush the biggest region,
|
||||
at that point they should almost all have about 5MB of data so
|
||||
it would flush that amount. 5MB inserted later, it would flush another
|
||||
region that will now have a bit over 5MB of data, and so on.
|
||||
This is currently the main limiting factor for the number of regions; see <xref linkend="ops.capacity.regions.count" />
|
||||
for detailed formula.
|
||||
</para></listitem>
|
||||
<listitem><para>The master as is is allergic to tons of regions, and will
|
||||
take a lot of time assigning them and moving them around in batches.
|
||||
The reason is that it's heavy on ZK usage, and it's not very async
|
||||
at the moment (could really be improved -- and has been imporoved a bunch
|
||||
in 0.96 hbase).
|
||||
</para></listitem>
|
||||
<listitem><para>
|
||||
In older versions of HBase (pre-v2 hfile, 0.90 and previous), tons of regions
|
||||
on a few RS can cause the store file index to rise, increasing heap usage and potentially
|
||||
creating memory pressure or OOME on the RSs
|
||||
</para></listitem>
|
||||
</orderedlist>
|
||||
</para>
|
||||
</section>
|
||||
<para>Another issue is the effect of the number of regions on mapreduce jobs; it is typical to have one mapper per HBase region.
|
||||
Thus, hosting only 5 regions per RS may not be enough to get sufficient number of tasks for a mapreduce job, while 1000 regions will generate far too many tasks.
|
||||
</para>
|
||||
<para>See <xref linkend="ops.capacity.regions" /> for configuration guidelines.</para>
|
||||
</section>
|
||||
|
||||
<section xml:id="regions.arch.assignment">
|
||||
|
|
@ -1786,7 +1794,7 @@ rs.close();
|
|||
</para>
|
||||
</section>
|
||||
|
||||
<section>
|
||||
<section xml:id="arch.region.splits">
|
||||
<title>Region Splits</title>
|
||||
|
||||
<para>Splits run unaided on the RegionServer; i.e. the Master does not
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -1081,74 +1081,11 @@ index e70ebc6..96f8c27 100644
|
|||
</para>
|
||||
<para>See <xref linkend="compression" /> for more information.</para>
|
||||
</section>
|
||||
<section xml:id="bigger.regions">
|
||||
<title>Bigger Regions</title>
|
||||
<para>
|
||||
Consider going to larger regions to cut down on the total number of regions
|
||||
on your cluster. Generally less Regions to manage makes for a smoother running
|
||||
cluster (You can always later manually split the big Regions should one prove
|
||||
hot and you want to spread the request load over the cluster). A lower number of regions is
|
||||
preferred, generally in the range of 20 to low-hundreds
|
||||
per RegionServer. Adjust the regionsize as appropriate to achieve this number.
|
||||
</para>
|
||||
<para>For the 0.90.x codebase, the upper-bound of regionsize is about 4Gb, with a default of 256Mb.
|
||||
For 0.92.x codebase, due to the HFile v2 change much larger regionsizes can be supported (e.g., 20Gb).
|
||||
</para>
|
||||
<para>You may need to experiment with this setting based on your hardware configuration and application needs.
|
||||
</para>
|
||||
<para>Adjust <code>hbase.hregion.max.filesize</code> in your <filename>hbase-site.xml</filename>.
|
||||
RegionSize can also be set on a per-table basis via
|
||||
<link xlink:href="http://hbase.apache.org/apidocs/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/HTableDescriptor.html">HTableDescriptor</link>.
|
||||
</para>
|
||||
<section xml:id="too_many_regions">
|
||||
<title>How many regions per RegionServer?</title>
|
||||
<para>
|
||||
Typically you want to keep your region count low on HBase for numerous reasons.
|
||||
Usually right around 100 regions per RegionServer has yielded the best results.
|
||||
Here are some of the reasons below for keeping region count low:
|
||||
<orderedlist>
|
||||
<listitem><para>
|
||||
MSLAB requires 2mb per memstore (that's 2mb per family per region).
|
||||
1000 regions that have 2 families each is 3.9GB of heap used, and it's not even storing data yet. NB: the 2MB value is configurable.
|
||||
</para></listitem>
|
||||
<listitem><para>If you fill all the regions at somewhat the same rate, the global memory usage makes it that it forces tiny
|
||||
flushes when you have too many regions which in turn generates compactions.
|
||||
Rewriting the same data tens of times is the last thing you want.
|
||||
An example is filling 1000 regions (with one family) equally and let's consider a lower bound for global memstore
|
||||
usage of 5GB (the region server would have a big heap).
|
||||
Once it reaches 5GB it will force flush the biggest region,
|
||||
at that point they should almost all have about 5MB of data so
|
||||
it would flush that amount. 5MB inserted later, it would flush another
|
||||
region that will now have a bit over 5MB of data, and so on.
|
||||
A basic formula for the amount of regions to have per region server would
|
||||
look like this:
|
||||
Heap * upper global memstore limit = amount of heap devoted to memstore
|
||||
then the amount of heap devoted to memstore / (Number of regions per RS * CFs).
|
||||
This will give you the rough memstore size if everything is being written to.
|
||||
A more accurate formula is
|
||||
Heap * upper global memstore limit = amount of heap devoted to memstore then the
|
||||
amount of heap devoted to memstore / (Number of actively written regions per RS * CFs).
|
||||
This can allot you a higher region count from the write perspective if you know how many
|
||||
regions you will be writing to at one time.
|
||||
</para></listitem>
|
||||
<listitem><para>The master as is is allergic to tons of regions, and will
|
||||
take a lot of time assigning them and moving them around in batches.
|
||||
The reason is that it's heavy on ZK usage, and it's not very async
|
||||
at the moment (could really be improved -- and has been imporoved a bunch
|
||||
in 0.96 hbase).
|
||||
</para></listitem>
|
||||
<listitem><para>
|
||||
In older versions of HBase (pre-v2 hfile, 0.90 and previous), tons of regions
|
||||
on a few RS can cause the store file index to rise raising heap usage and can
|
||||
create memory pressure or OOME on the RSs
|
||||
</para></listitem>
|
||||
</orderedlist>
|
||||
</para>
|
||||
<para>Another issue is the effect of the number of regions on mapreduce jobs.
|
||||
Keeping 5 regions per RS would be too low for a job, whereas 1000 will generate too many maps.
|
||||
</para>
|
||||
</section>
|
||||
|
||||
<section xml:id="config.wals"><title>Configuring the size and number of WAL files</title>
|
||||
<para>HBase uses <xref linkend="wal" /> to recover the memstore data that has not been flushed to disk in case of an RS failure. These WAL files should be configured to be slightly smaller than HDFS block (by default, HDFS block is 64Mb and WAL file is ~60Mb).</para>
|
||||
<para>HBase also has a limit on number of WAL files, designed to ensure there's never too much data that needs to be replayed during recovery. This limit needs to be set according to memstore configuration, so that all the necessary data would fit. It is recommended to allocated enough WAL files to store at least that much data (when all memstores are close to full).
|
||||
For example, with 16Gb RS heap, default memstore settings (0.4), and default WAL file size (~60Mb), 16Gb*0.4/60, the starting point for WAL file count is ~109.
|
||||
However, as all memstores are not expected to be full all the time, less WAL files can be allocated.</para>
|
||||
</section>
|
||||
<section xml:id="disable.splitting">
|
||||
<title>Managed Splitting</title>
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -920,37 +920,73 @@ false
|
|||
</section>
|
||||
</section> <!-- snapshots -->
|
||||
|
||||
<section xml:id="ops.capacity"><title>Capacity Planning</title>
|
||||
<section xml:id="ops.capacity.storage"><title>Storage</title>
|
||||
<para>A common question for HBase administrators is estimating how much storage will be required for an HBase cluster.
|
||||
There are several apsects to consider, the most important of which is what data load into the cluster. Start
|
||||
with a solid understanding of how HBase handles data internally (KeyValue).
|
||||
</para>
|
||||
<section xml:id="ops.capacity.storage.kv"><title>KeyValue</title>
|
||||
<para>HBase storage will be dominated by KeyValues. See <xref linkend="keyvalue" /> and <xref linkend="keysize" /> for
|
||||
how HBase stores data internally.
|
||||
</para>
|
||||
<para>It is critical to understand that there is a KeyValue instance for every attribute stored in a row, and the
|
||||
rowkey-length, ColumnFamily name-length and attribute lengths will drive the size of the database more than any other
|
||||
factor.
|
||||
</para>
|
||||
</section>
|
||||
<section xml:id="ops.capacity.storage.sf"><title>StoreFiles and Blocks</title>
|
||||
<para>KeyValue instances are aggregated into blocks, and the blocksize is configurable on a per-ColumnFamily basis.
|
||||
Blocks are aggregated into StoreFile's. See <xref linkend="regions.arch" />.
|
||||
</para>
|
||||
</section>
|
||||
<section xml:id="ops.capacity.storage.hdfs"><title>HDFS Block Replication</title>
|
||||
<para>Because HBase runs on top of HDFS, factor in HDFS block replication into storage calculations.
|
||||
</para>
|
||||
</section>
|
||||
</section>
|
||||
<section xml:id="ops.capacity.regions"><title>Regions</title>
|
||||
<para>Another common question for HBase administrators is determining the right number of regions per
|
||||
RegionServer. This affects both storage and hardware planning. See <xref linkend="perf.number.of.regions" />.
|
||||
</para>
|
||||
</section>
|
||||
</section>
|
||||
<section xml:id="ops.capacity"><title>Capacity Planning and Region Sizing</title>
|
||||
<para>There are several considerations when planning the capacity for an HBase cluster and performing the initial configuration. Start with a solid understanding of how HBase handles data internally.</para>
|
||||
<section xml:id="ops.capacity.nodes"><title>Node count and hardware/VM configuration</title>
|
||||
<section xml:id="ops.capacity.nodes.datasize"><title>Physical data size</title>
|
||||
<para>Physical data size on disk is distinct from logical size of your data and is affected by the following:
|
||||
<itemizedlist>
|
||||
<listitem>Increased by HBase overhead
|
||||
<itemizedlist>
|
||||
<listitem>See <xref linkend="keyvalue" /> and <xref linkend="keysize" />. At least 24 bytes per key-value (cell), can be more. Small keys/values means more relative overhead.</listitem>
|
||||
<listitem>KeyValue instances are aggregated into blocks, which are indexed. Indexes also have to be stored. Blocksize is configurable on a per-ColumnFamily basis. See <xref linkend="regions.arch" />.</listitem>
|
||||
</itemizedlist></listitem>
|
||||
<listitem>Decreased by <xref linkend="compression" xrefstyle="template:compression" /> and data block encoding, depending on data. See also <ulink url="http://search-hadoop.com/m/lL12B1PFVhp1">this thread</ulink>. You might want to test what compression and encoding (if any) make sense for your data.</listitem>
|
||||
<listitem>Increased by size of region server <xref linkend="wal" xrefstyle="template:WAL" /> (usually fixed and negligible - less than half of RS memory size, per RS).</listitem>
|
||||
<listitem>Increased by HDFS replication - usually x3.</listitem>
|
||||
</itemizedlist></para>
|
||||
<para>Aside from the disk space necessary to store the data, one RS may not be able to serve arbitrarily large amounts of data due to some practical limits on region count and size (see <xref linkend="ops.capacity.regions" xrefstyle="template:below" />).</para>
|
||||
</section> <!-- ops.capacity.nodes.datasize -->
|
||||
<section xml:id="ops.capacity.nodes.throughput"><title>Read/Write throughput</title>
|
||||
<para>Number of nodes can also be driven by required thoughput for reads and/or writes. The throughput one can get per node depends a lot on data (esp. key/value sizes) and request patterns, as well as node and system configuration. Planning should be done for peak load if it is likely that the load would be the main driver of the increase of the node count. PerformanceEvaluation and <xref linkend="ycsb" xrefstyle="template:YCSB" /> tools can be used to test single node or a test cluster.</para>
|
||||
<para>For write, usually 5-15Mb/s per RS can be expected, since every region server has only one active WAL. There's no good estimate for reads, as it depends vastly on data, requests, and cache hit rate. <xref linkend="perf.casestudy" /> might be helpful.</para>
|
||||
</section> <!-- ops.capacity.nodes.throughput -->
|
||||
<section xml:id="ops.capacity.nodes.gc"><title>JVM GC limitations</title>
|
||||
<para>RS cannot currently utilize very large heap due to cost of GC. There's also no good way of running multiple RS-es per server (other than running several VMs per machine). Thus, ~20-24Gb or less memory dedicated to one RS is recommended. GC tuning is required for large heap sizes. See <xref linkend="gcpause" />, <xref linkend="trouble.log.gc" /> and elsewhere (TODO: where?)</para>
|
||||
</section> <!-- ops.capacity.nodes.gc -->
|
||||
</section> <!-- ops.capacity.nodes -->
|
||||
<section xml:id="ops.capacity.regions"><title>Determining region count and size</title>
|
||||
<para>Generally less regions makes for a smoother running cluster (you can always manually split the big regions later (if necessary) to spread the data, or request load, over the cluster); 20-200 regions per RS is a reasonable range. The number of regions cannot be configured directly (unless you go for fully <xref linkend="disable.splitting" xrefstyle="template:manual splitting" />); adjust the region size to achieve the target region size given table size.</para>
|
||||
<para>When configuring regions for multiple tables, note that most region settings can be set on a per-table basis via <link xlink:href="http://hbase.apache.org/apidocs/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/HTableDescriptor.html">HTableDescriptor</link>, as well as shell commands. These settings will override the ones in <varname>hbase-site.xml</varname>. That is useful if your tables have different workloads/use cases.</para>
|
||||
<para>Also note that in the discussion of region sizes here, <emphasis role="bold">HDFS replication factor is not (and should not be) taken into account, whereas other factors <xref linkend="ops.capacity.nodes.datasize" xrefstyle="template:above" /> should be.</emphasis> So, if your data is compressed and replicated 3 ways by HDFS, "9 Gb region" means 9 Gb of compressed data. HDFS replication factor only affects your disk usage and is invisible to most HBase code.</para>
|
||||
<section xml:id="ops.capacity.regions.count"><title>Number of regions per RS - upper bound</title>
|
||||
<para>In production scenarios, where you have a lot of data, you are normally concerned with the maximum number of regions you can have per server. <xref linkend="too_many_regions" /> has technical discussion on the subject; in short, maximum number of regions is mostly determined by memstore memory usage. Each region has its own memstores; these grow up to a configurable size; usually in 128-256Mb range, see <xref linkend="hbase.hregion.memstore.flush.size" />. There's one memstore per column family (so there's only one per region if there's one CF in the table). RS dedicates some fraction of total memory (see <xref linkend="hbase.regionserver.global.memstore.upperLimit" />) to region memstores. If this memory is exceeded (too much memstore usage), undesirable consequences such as unresponsive server, or later compaction storms, can result. Thus, a good starting point for the number of regions per RS (assuming one table) is <programlisting>(RS memory)*(total memstore fraction)/((memstore size)*(# column families))</programlisting>
|
||||
E.g. if RS has 16Gb RAM, with default settings, it is 16384*0.4/128 ~ 51 regions per RS is a starting point. The formula can be extended to multiple tables; if they all have the same configuration, just use total number of families.</para>
|
||||
<para>This number can be adjusted; the formula above assumes all your regions are filled at approximately the same rate. If only a fraction of your regions are going to be actively written to, you can divide the result by that fraction to get a larger region count. Then, even if all regions are written to, all region memstores are not filled evenly, and eventually jitter appears even if they are (due to limited number of concurrent flushes). Thus, one can have as many as 2-3 times more regions than the starting point; however, increased numbers carry increased risk.</para>
|
||||
<para>For write-heavy workload, memstore fraction can be increased in configuration at the expense of block cache; this will also allow one to have more regions.</para>
|
||||
</section> <!-- ops.capacity.regions.count -->
|
||||
<section xml:id="ops.capacity.regions.mincount"><title>Number of regions per RS - lower bound</title>
|
||||
<para>HBase scales by having regions across many servers. Thus if you have 2 regions for 16GB data, on a 20 node machine your data will be concentrated on just a few machines - nearly the entire cluster will be idle. This really can't be stressed enough, since a common problem is loading 200MB data into HBase and then wondering why your awesome 10 node cluster isn't doing anything.</para>
|
||||
<para>On the other hand, if you have a very large amount of data, you may also want to go for a larger number of regions to avoid having regions that are too large.</para>
|
||||
</section> <!-- ops.capacity.regions.mincount -->
|
||||
<section xml:id="ops.capacity.regions.size"><title>Maximum region size</title>
|
||||
<para>For large tables in production scenarios, maximum region size is mostly limited by compactions - very large compactions, esp. major, can degrade cluster performance. Currently, the recommended maximum region size is 10-20Gb, and 5-10Gb is optimal. For older 0.90.x codebase, the upper-bound of regionsize is about 4Gb, with a default of 256Mb.</para>
|
||||
<para>The size at which the region is split into two is generally configured via <xref linkend="hbase.hregion.max.filesize" />; for details, see <xref linkend="arch.region.splits" />.</para>
|
||||
<para>If you cannot estimate the size of your tables well, when starting off, it's probably best to stick to the default region size, perhaps going smaller for hot tables (or manually split hot regions to spread the load over the cluster), or go with larger region sizes if your cell sizes tend to be largish (100k and up).</para>
|
||||
<para>In HBase 0.98, experimental stripe compactions feature was added that would allow for larger regions, especially for log data. See <xref linkend="ops.stripe" />.</para>
|
||||
</section> <!-- ops.capacity.regions.size -->
|
||||
<section xml:id="ops.capacity.regions.total"><title>Total data size per region server</title>
|
||||
<para>According to above numbers for region size and number of regions per region server, in an optimistic estimate 10 GB x 100 regions per RS will give up to 1TB served per region server, which is in line with some of the reported multi-PB use cases. However, it is important to think about the data vs cache size ratio at the RS level. With 1TB of data per server and 10 GB block cache, only 1% of the data will be cached, which may barely cover all block indices.</para>
|
||||
</section> <!-- ops.capacity.regions.total -->
|
||||
</section> <!-- ops.capacity.regions -->
|
||||
<section xml:id="ops.capacity.config"><title>Initial configuration and tuning</title>
|
||||
<para>First, see <xref linkend="important_configurations" />. Note that some configurations, more than others, depend on specific scenarios. Pay special attention to
|
||||
<itemizedlist>
|
||||
<listitem><xref linkend="hbase.regionserver.handler.count" /> - request handler thread count, vital for high-throughput workloads.</listitem>
|
||||
<listitem><xref linkend="config.wals" /> - the blocking number of WAL files depends on your memstore configuration and should be set accordingly to prevent potential blocking when doing high volume of writes.</listitem>
|
||||
</itemizedlist></para>
|
||||
<para>Then, there are some considerations when setting up your cluster and tables.</para>
|
||||
<section xml:id="ops.capacity.config.compactions"><title>Compactions</title>
|
||||
<para>Depending on read/write volume and latency requirements, optimal compaction settings may be different. See <xref linkend="compaction" /> for some details.</para>
|
||||
<para>When provisioning for large data sizes, however, it's good to keep in mind that compactions can affect write throughput. Thus, for write-intensive workloads, you may opt for less frequent compactions and more store files per regions. Minimum number of files for compactions (<varname>hbase.hstore.compaction.min</varname>) can be set to higher value; <xref linkend="hbase.hstore.blockingStoreFiles" /> should also be increased, as more files might accumulate in such case. You may also consider manually managing compactions: <xref linkend="managed.compactions" /></para>
|
||||
</section> <!-- ops.capacity.config.compactions -->
|
||||
<section xml:id="ops.capacity.config.presplit"><title>Pre-splitting the table</title>
|
||||
<para>Based on the target number of the regions per RS (see <xref linkend="ops.capacity.regions.count" xrefstyle="template:above" />) and number of RSes, one can pre-split the table at creation time. This would both avoid some costly splitting as the table starts to fill up, and ensure that the table starts out already distributed across many servers.</para>
|
||||
<para>If the table is expected to grow large enough to justify that, at least one region per RS should be created. It is not recommended to split immediately into the full target number of regions (e.g. 50 * number of RSes), but a low intermediate value can be chosen. For multiple tables, it is recommended to be conservative with presplitting (e.g. pre-split 1 region per RS at most), especially if you don't know how much each table will grow. If you split too much, you may end up with too many regions, with some tables having too many small regions.</para>
|
||||
<para>For pre-splitting howto, see <xref linkend="precreate.regions" />.</para>
|
||||
</section> <!-- ops.capacity.config.presplit -->
|
||||
</section> <!-- ops.capacity.config -->
|
||||
</section> <!-- ops.capacity -->
|
||||
<section xml:id="table.rename"><title>Table Rename</title>
|
||||
<para>In versions 0.90.x of hbase and earlier, we had a simple script that would rename the hdfs
|
||||
table directory and then do an edit of the .META. table replacing all mentions of the old
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -156,15 +156,6 @@
|
|||
|
||||
<para>See <xref linkend="recommended_configurations" />.</para>
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
<section xml:id="perf.number.of.regions">
|
||||
<title>Number of Regions</title>
|
||||
|
||||
<para>The number of regions for an HBase table is driven by the <xref
|
||||
linkend="bigger.regions" />. Also, see the architecture
|
||||
section on <xref linkend="arch.regions.size" /></para>
|
||||
</section>
|
||||
|
||||
<section xml:id="perf.compactions.and.splits">
|
||||
<title>Managing Compactions</title>
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -248,7 +239,7 @@
|
|||
<link xlink:href="http://hbase.apache.org/apidocs/org/apache/hadoop/hbase/HTableDescriptor.html">HTableDescriptor</link> in the
|
||||
event where certain tables require different regionsizes than the configured default regionsize.
|
||||
</para>
|
||||
<para>See <xref linkend="perf.number.of.regions"/> for more information.
|
||||
<para>See <xref linkend="ops.capacity.regions"/> for more information.
|
||||
</para>
|
||||
</section>
|
||||
<section xml:id="schema.bloom">
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue