hbase-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Otis Gospodnetic <otis.gospodne...@gmail.com>
Subject 1 table, 1 dense CF => N tables, 1 dense CF ?
Date Wed, 07 Jan 2015 17:27:55 GMT
Hi,

It's been asked before, but I didn't find any *definite* answers and a lot
of answers I found via  are from a whiiiile back.

e.g. Tsuna provided pretty convincing info here:
http://search-hadoop.com/m/xAiiO8ttU2/%2522%2522I+generally+recommend+to+stick+to+a+single+table%2522&subj=Re+One+table+or+multiple+tables+

... but that is from 3 years ago.  Maybe things changed?

Here's our use case:

Data/table layout:
* HBase is used for storing metrics at different granularities (1min, 5
min.... - a total of 6 different granularities)
* It's a multi-tenant system
* Keys are carefully crafted and include userId + number, where this number
contains the time and the granularity
* Everything's in 1 table and 1 CF

Access:
* We only access 1 system at a time, for a specific time range, and
specific granularity
* We periodically scan ALL data and delete data older than N days, where N
varies from user to user
* We periodically scan ALL data and merge multiple rows (of the same
granularity) into 1

Question:
Would there be any advantage in having 6 tables - one for each granularity
- instead of having everything in 1 table?
Assume each table would still have just 1 CF and the keys would remain the
same.

Thanks,
Otis
--
Monitoring * Alerting * Anomaly Detection * Centralized Log Management
Solr & Elasticsearch Support * http://sematext.com/

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