Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
HBase >> mail # dev >> Thinking about 0.98


Copy link to this message
-
Re: Thinking about 0.98
+1 Phoenix could leverage this too.

On Aug 23, 2013, at 4:04 PM, Dan Burkert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Yep.  To support descending sort index scans Honeycomb has to maintain a separate descending index, which slows down inserts/updates/deletes and doubles the storage overhead of indices. We would gladly pay a performance hit for descending scans if it meant not having to store indices twice.
>
> Descending scans also make sense WRT the new data types API. Currently you can pick whether you want the type to sort ascending or descending, but if you need both the only option is to duplicate.  Obviously some people may prefer to scan their data primarily in descending sort, so unless descending scan speed becomes on-par with ascending it still makes sense to have the choice.
>
> -- Dan
>
> On Aug 23, 2013, at 1:15 PM, Stack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 8:41 PM, Dan Burkert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> As an interested bystander (user) I would love to see the reverse scan
>>> feature (HBASE-4811 (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-4811))
>>> make 0.98.  There has been a lot of talk about HBase indexes lately, and
>>> the ability to reverse scan an index opens up a lot of possibilities.
>>>
>>
>> Do you need it for you mysql'ing Dan?
>> St.Ack
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB