hbase-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From jeff saremi <jeffsar...@hotmail.com>
Subject Re: Performance: HBase Native Java Client versus Thrift Java client
Date Mon, 30 Jan 2017 20:59:31 GMT
Thanks Josh

I made a mistake in mentioning the master. It looks like the client contacts the Region Server
which holds the Meta table.

Of a query into the meta table to get the RegionServer for a given key, it wasn't clear to
me what was being cached on the client? Also on the same topic, is a Thrift server assisting
this process in any shape or form? to make its presence necessary?

Is there anything else that the Thrift server might be contributing to positively?

From: Josh Elser <elserj@apache.org>
Sent: Monday, January 30, 2017 11:57 AM
To: user@hbase.apache.org
Subject: Re: Performance: HBase Native Java Client versus Thrift Java client

Would recommend that you brush up on your understanding of the HBase

Clients do not receive table data from the HBase Master at any point.
This is purely a RegionServer operation.


jeff saremi wrote:
> I'd like to understand if there are any considerations on why one would use thrift versus
the direct client?
> I was told that Thrift server allow key-caching which would result in faster key-to-regionserver
queries as opposed to getting that from the Hbase master nodes. It would also alleviate the
load on the master.
> At the same time, we know if going through Thrift would add to the latency since it's
an indirect way of getting at data.
> thanks
> Jeff

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