hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Elliott Clark <ecl...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [PROPOSAL] HBASE-10070 branch
Date Thu, 16 Jan 2014 00:43:18 GMT
On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 3:57 PM, Enis Söztutar <enis.soz@gmail.com> wrote:

> I am afraid, it is not coprocessors or current set of plugins only. We need
> changes in the
> RPC, meta, region server, LB and master. Since we cannot easily get hooks
> into all these in
> a clean manner, implementing this purely outside would be next to
> impossible.

I'm pretty unconvinced that this is the correct way forward.  It seems to
introduce a lot of risk without a lot of gain.  Right now to me the 100%
correct way forward is through paxos.  That's a lot of work but it has the
most payoff in the end.  It will allow much faster recovery, much easier
read sharding, it allows the greatest flexibility on IO.

On the other end of the spectrum is something like MySQL/Postgres read
slaves (either tables or clusters).  Read slaves built on top of what's
currently there seem to give all of the benefits of read slaves built into
the current HBase without all of the risk. Sharding on top of the already
built datastore is a pretty well known and well understood problem.  There
are lots of great example of making this scale to pretty insane heights.
 You lose very little flexibility and incur almost not risk to the
stability of HBase.

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