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
Accumulo >> mail # user >> TimestampFilter Performance [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]


Copy link to this message
-
RE: TimestampFilter Performance [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]
It will be more efficient to narrow the set of keys to evaluate than look at
all of them and evaluate the timestamp.

 

From: Dickson, Matt MR [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2013 7:12 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: TimestampFilter Performance [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

 

UNOFFICIAL

Is the TimestampFilter an efficient means of filtering results by time
ranges?  I have the option of extending the existing rowid's, currently
pre-fixed with yyyymmdd, to include hhmm also, or make use of the
TimestampFilter.  In a quick google search someone mentioned that the
TimestampFilter was inefficient is this correct?

 

Matt

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