Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-hbase-user-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 94040E12A for ; Mon, 3 Dec 2012 19:59:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 85281 invoked by uid 500); 3 Dec 2012 19:59:07 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hbase-user-archive@hbase.apache.org Received: (qmail 85231 invoked by uid 500); 3 Dec 2012 19:59:07 -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 85220 invoked by uid 99); 3 Dec 2012 19:59:07 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 03 Dec 2012 19:59:07 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of varun@pinterest.com designates 209.85.223.182 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.223.182] (HELO mail-ie0-f182.google.com) (209.85.223.182) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 03 Dec 2012 19:58:59 +0000 Received: by mail-ie0-f182.google.com with SMTP id s9so5893315iec.13 for ; Mon, 03 Dec 2012 11:58:38 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :x-gm-message-state; bh=v5tFRanhwI5LXowl0VaPxN8GGZPShJkIptRJnvNFCWM=; b=XCiZf7ovMZcpBCUFZan54OkHWrEXBroEBy08KJXbSDZM6tYIjKpfwoF/5Iq0QdYZzA V6I1U0HWnbI/TJpxMbX2n2Y527GNGEggUG+FEVOc8szIEnT9X0JUiQEUCGgw/pKomBn6 4G6LHHvyUOX5mnLy+bpaO8ZjTgJFHNXCik2zkXXRc0equhv0xCPq71Qoa5MdZIiSG42Y gQjEzGoiDMVbwiVeP53MgESg8jcTlX4+lWeLoyJbxpTQom9XzGIm2H1+qffDOhWtKHai 5CDfon/YIMBZZ06a/1CilcQIi7B03B+aMx/iPgOpXeoKLrivwom/5ona/7M8D2y/A5f1 N/bA== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.50.40.133 with SMTP id x5mr246819igk.32.1354564718365; Mon, 03 Dec 2012 11:58:38 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.231.152.67 with HTTP; Mon, 3 Dec 2012 11:58:38 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 11:58:38 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Long row + column keys From: Varun Sharma To: user@hbase.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=14dae93403d9dd0a2204cff82c24 X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlV9Z7PUsVwI6RujK2GTHbj6VqSrWeci7xW/N4P/gJWQGouMgH879NVPyY1sNRqIlTOtZ9L X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --14dae93403d9dd0a2204cff82c24 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi, I have a schema where the rows are 8 bytes long and the columns are 12 bytes long (roughly 1000 columns per row). The value is 0 bytes. Is this going to be space inefficient in terms of HFile size (large index + blocks) ? The total key size, as far as i know, would be 8 + 12 + 8 (timestamp) = 28 bytes. I am using hbase 0.94.0 which has HFile v2. Also, should I be using an encoding technique to get the number of bytes down (like PrefixDeltaEncoding) which is provided by hbase ? Thanks ! Varun --14dae93403d9dd0a2204cff82c24--