Mailing-List: contact user-help@hbase.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: user@hbase.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of tombrown52@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.212.41 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAO6W-2eHRLs0QfGLOLNmTjC1eZoQba6WUOTi1Jgoci-EdRqi6A@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAOT3TWob6nH4soM_BQVrS3SCjd1AU=vAjPYBh3mb7EiVrKWNGQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAO6W-2eHRLs0QfGLOLNmTjC1eZoQba6WUOTi1Jgoci-EdRqi6A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 13:27:05 -0600
Message-ID: 
 <CAHtRq2eujrVBHT=OLG3VouxbvN5wiE1HFpJdEi4BsLRKWZDhWQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Parallel scans
From: Tom Brown <tombrown52@gmail.com>
To: user@hbase.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

I think you could do it manually by looking up all the different
regions and starting a separate scan for each region. Not quite as
handy as the built-in multi get, but essentially the same.

Of course, that leaves the question of processing-- If you're
processing it in a single-threaded environment, HBase is unlikely to
be the bottleneck. If your sending each scan to multiple processors,
this could be a significant speedup.

--Tom

On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 11:34 PM, Bertrand Dechoux <dechouxb@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Are you talking about as coprocessor or MapReduce input? If it is the first
> then it is up to you (the client). If it is the latter I am not sure that
> -if scans were changed to be parallel (assuming they are sequential now)-
> the whole job would be noticeably faster. But I am interested in an answer
> too.
>
> Regards
>
> Bertrand
>
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 2:56 AM, Mohit Anchlia <mohitanchlia@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Is there a way to execute multiple scans in parallel like get?
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Bertrand Dechoux