Our Community is getting an upgrade! To get everything ready for the relaunch, we’ll be placing the site in read-only mode starting September 21st.
We really appreciate your understanding while we get things set up behind the scenes. Catch up on all the exciting details about the move here.
Need help or have questions? Drop us a line at [email protected]

Cloudera Community

Archives of Support Questions (Read Only)

This is an archived board for historical reference. Information and links may no longer be available or relevant
cancel
Turn on suggestions
Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Advanced Search
Announcements
This board is archived and read-only for historical reference. To ask a new question, please post a new topic on the appropriate active board.

Who agreed with this solution

avatar
author-rank AcharkiMed
Master Collaborator

Created ‎04-18-2018 02:27 AM

Hi all,

Finaly and after almost 6 months I have found the solution!

It was always about my 1024 limitition remark, the row batch limitation was from BATCH_SIZE max value (1024), in the last versions (CDH 5.14/Impala 2.11) we have a new effective range is 1-65536.
1-1024: https://www.cloudera.com/documentation/enterprise/5-12-x/topics/impala_batch_size.html
1-65536: https://www.cloudera.com/documentation/enterprise/5-14-x/topics/impala_batch_size.html

So when I increase it throgh a odbc.ini with SSP_BATCH_SIZE I can benifit from increasing the other odbc parameters (RowsFetchedPerBlock / TSaslTransportBufSize) and the rows can be fetched in a seconds (~45 secs) instead of tens of minutes.

Remark: I have been recreated the cluster in 3 different server providers and tested the connections from almost 5 others with different ODBC/JDBC releases etc.. and always I have the same slowness until this update came.
I can not understand why I'm the only on declared this big issue and why no one can answer me, kowning that it's realy depressed to have a good quering engine but a veeeery slow fetch rows!

Any way, thanks all for your replies.

View solution in original post

35,754
4
Who agreed with this solution