accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Josh Elser <josh.el...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Snappy as default table.file.compress.type?
Date Sun, 14 Aug 2016 03:06:23 GMT
Same motivation of using it as for making it the default. I am not aware 
of any downside to it. It's become pretty standard across all 
installations I've worked with for years.

Asking because I am no oracle on the matter. I could just be ignorant of 
some issue, but, given my current understanding, there is no downside 
for the average case.

Christopher wrote:
> Sorry. I wasn't clear. I understand the motivation for using it... I'm
> asking about the motivation for making it the default.
>
> Since both are available, I'm not sure the default matters *that* much, but
> it could be an unexpected change for those preferring GZ.
>
> Also, are there any risks regarding library availability of snappy? GZ is
> pretty ubiquitous.
>
> On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 10:59 PM Josh Elser<josh.elser@gmail.com>  wrote:
>
>> Uhh, besides what I already mentioned? (close in compressed size but
>> "much" faster)
>>
>> Christopher wrote:
>>> What's the motivation for changing it?
>>>
>>> On Sat, Aug 13, 2016 at 10:47 PM Josh Elser<josh.elser@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>> Any reason we don't want to do this? Last rule-of-thumb I heard was that
>>>> snappy is often close enough in compression to GZ but quite a bit faster
>>>> (I don't remember exactly how much).
>>>>
>>>> - Josh
>>>>
>

Mime
View raw message