accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From dlmar...@comcast.net
Subject Re: HBase and Accumulo
Date Wed, 19 Aug 2015 18:44:48 GMT
"I am looking for real gap comparing HBase to Accumulo if there is any so that I can be prepared
to address them. This is not limited to the security area. There are differences in some features
and implementations. But they don't see like real 'gaps'." 

He asked about gaps, but not feature and implementation gaps. Seems like architecture differences
would be ok to me. 


----- Original Message -----

From: "Sean Busbey" <busbey@cloudera.com> 
To: "dev" <dev@hbase.apache.org> 
Cc: "dev" <dev@accumulo.apache.org> 
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2015 2:40:45 PM 
Subject: Re: HBase and Accumulo 

Let's please stick to the topic Jerry asked about: security features. 

We can get into all sorts of discussions around scalability and read/write 
performance in a different joint thread if folks want. We all have lots of 
Opinions (and the YCSB community would love to see more of y'all show up to 
improve it's suitability for comparing things ;) ). However, I think we're 
all in agreement that both systems scale "well enough" for the vast 
majority of use cases. 


On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 1:37 PM, Ted Malaska <ted.malaska@cloudera.com> 
wrote: 

> Sorry Type-o 
> 
> So there might be issues when you pass the Quadrillion. But Like I said 
> never ran into that issue of region limits. 
> 
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Ted Malaska <ted.malaska@cloudera.com> 
> wrote: 
> 
> > Sorry 10 billion a day so that is 7 Trillion records. So many issues 
> > around 1000 Trillion 
> > 
> > On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Ted Malaska <ted.malaska@cloudera.com> 
> > wrote: 
> > 
> >> I've been doing HBase for a long time and never had an issue with region 
> >> count limits and I have clusters with 10s of billions of records. Many 
> >> there would be issues around a couple Trillion records, but never got 
> that 
> >> high yet. 
> >> 
> >> Ted Malaska 
> >> 
> >> On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 2:24 PM, Josh Elser <josh.elser@gmail.com> 
> wrote: 
> >> 
> >>> Oh, one other thing that I should mention (was prompted off-list). 
> >>> 
> >>> (definition time since cross-list now: HBase regions == Accumulo 
> tablets) 
> >>> 
> >>> Accumulo will handle many more regions than HBase does now due to a 
> >>> splittable metadata table. While I was told this was a very long and 
> >>> arduous journey to implement correctly (WRT splitting, merges and bulk 
> >>> loading), users with "too many regions" problems are extremely few and 
> far 
> >>> between for Accumulo. 
> >>> 
> >>> I was very happy to see effort/design being put into this in HBase. 
> And, 
> >>> just to be fair in criticism/praises, HBase does appear to me to do 
> >>> assignments of regions much faster than Accumulo does on a small 
> cluster 
> >>> (~5-10 nodes). Accumulo may take a few seconds to notice and reassign 
> >>> tablets. I have yet to notice this with HBase (which also could be due 
> to 
> >>> lack of personal testing). 
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> Jerry He wrote: 
> >>> 
> >>>> Hi, folks 
> >>>> 
> >>>> We have people that are evaluating HBase vs Accumulo. 
> >>>> Security is an important factor. 
> >>>> 
> >>>> But I think after the Cell security was added in HBase, there is no

> more 
> >>>> real gap compared to Accumulo. 
> >>>> 
> >>>> I know we have both HBase and Accumulo experts on this list. 
> >>>> Could someone shred more light? 
> >>>> I am looking for real gap comparing HBase to Accumulo if there is any

> so 
> >>>> that I can be prepared to address them. This is not limited to the 
> >>>> security 
> >>>> area. 
> >>>> 
> >>>> There are differences in some features and implementations. But they

> >>>> don't 
> >>>> see like real 'gaps'. 
> >>>> 
> >>>> Any comments and feedbacks are welcome. 
> >>>> 
> >>>> Thanks, 
> >>>> 
> >>>> Jerry 
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >> 
> > 
> 



-- 
Sean 


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message