hbase-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: HBase value design
Date Thu, 28 Nov 2013 15:22:11 GMT
Amit:
In your example you use Writable for serialization.
In 0.96 and beyond, protobuf is used in place of Writable.

If there is a possibility a new member would be added to the tuple,
consider using some scheme that allows the expansion.

Please take a look at this as well:
HBASE-8089 Add type support

Cheers


On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 5:17 AM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari <
jean-marc@spaggiari.org> wrote:

> Hi Amit,
>
> It all depends on your usecase ;)
>
> If you always access countIn and countFloat when you access a value, then
> put them together to avoid to have to do 2 calls or a scan or a multiget.
> But if you never access them together, you might want to separate them to
> reduce RCP transfert, etc.
>
>
> JM
>
>
> 2013/11/28 Amit Sela <amits@infolinks.com>
>
> > There are a lot of discussions here regarding the row design but I have a
> > question about the value design:
> >
> > Say I have a table t1 with rows r1,r2...rn and family f.
> > I also have qualifiers q1,q2...,qm
> >
> > For each (ri,fi,qi) tuple I want to store a value vi that is a data blob
> > that implements Writable and has two members:
> > Integer countInt
> > Float countFloat
> >
> > Would you change the design so that I'll have 2m qualifiers i.e.,
> > q1_countInt and q1_countFloat etc.
> > with IntWritable and FloatWritable values (respectively) ? or stay with
> the
> > data blob ?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Amit.
> >
>

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