nce. Also, the build measurements include the data
> generation, which influences the results.
>
> If you want to purely benchmark the HashTable performance, try using
> something like "Tuple2" or so (or write your own custom
> TypeSerializer / TypeComparator).
>
> Stephan
>
3/13/peeking-into-Apache-Flinks-Engine-Room.html
>
>
> 2017-05-15 16:26 GMT+02:00 weijie tong :
>
>> The Flink version is 1.2.0
>>
>> On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 10:24 PM, weijie tong
>> wrote:
>>
>>> @Till thanks for your reply.
>>>
>&g
The Flink version is 1.2.0
On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 10:24 PM, weijie tong
wrote:
> @Till thanks for your reply.
>
> My code is similar to HashTableITCase.testInMemoryMutableHashTable()
> . It just use the MutableHashTable class , there's no other Flink's
> configura
ble elapsed:1885ms
On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 6:20 PM, Till Rohrmann wrote:
> Hi Weijie,
>
> it might be the case that batching the processing of multiple rows can
> give you an improved performance compared to single row processing.
>
> Maybe you could share the exact benchmark b
I has a test case to use Flink's MutableHashTable class to do a hash join
on a local machine with 64g memory, 64cores. The test case is one build
table with 14w rows ,one probe table with 320w rows ,the matched result
rows is 12 w.
It takes 2.2 seconds to complete the join.The performance seems ba
