Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 43696 invoked from network); 12 Nov 2010 18:39:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 12 Nov 2010 18:39:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 52526 invoked by uid 500); 12 Nov 2010 18:39:50 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-user-archive@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 52488 invoked by uid 500); 12 Nov 2010 18:39:50 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@hbase.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@hbase.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 52480 invoked by uid 99); 12 Nov 2010 18:39:50 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 12 Nov 2010 18:39:50 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of amp@opendns.com designates 67.215.68.163 as permitted sender) Received: from [67.215.68.163] (HELO mail.opendns.com) (67.215.68.163) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 12 Nov 2010 18:39:41 +0000 Received: from Adams-Desktop.local ([67.215.69.42]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.opendns.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-5) with ESMTP id oACIdJHY004957 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 12 Nov 2010 18:39:19 GMT Message-ID: <4CDD89D7.6040407@opendns.com> Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 10:39:19 -0800 From: Adam Phelps User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101027 Thunderbird/3.1.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: user@hbase.apache.org Subject: Re: Bulk Load Sample Code References: <4CDD8328.9030007@opendns.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 11/12/10 10:34 AM, Shuja Rehman wrote: > @Adam > Why u not use the configureIncrementalLoad() which automatically sets up a > TotalOrderPartitioner ? I just wasn't aware of this method until today. If that produces a more efficient result then I'll be switching to it. - Adam