Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
HBase >> mail # user >> LZO vs GZIP vs NO COMPREESSION: why is GZIP the winner ???

Copy link to this message
Re: LZO vs GZIP vs NO COMPREESSION: why is GZIP the winner ???
Unfortunately I can post only some snapshots.

I have no region split (I insert just 100000 rows so there is no
split, except when I don't use compression).

I use HBase 0.20.2 and to insert I use the HTable.put(list<Put>);

The only difference between my 3 tests is the way I create the test

HBaseAdmin admin = new HBaseAdmin(config);

HTableDescriptor desc = new HTableDescriptor(name);

HColumnDescriptor colDesc;

colDesc = new HColumnDescriptor(Bytes.toBytes("meta:"));
colDesc.setCompressionType(Algorithm.GZ); <- LZO or NONE

colDesc = new HColumnDescriptor(Bytes.toBytes("data:"));
colDesc.setCompressionType(Algorithm.GZ); <- LZO or NONE


A typical row inserted is made of 13 columns with a short content,
as show here:

1264761195240/6ffc3fe659023 column=data:accuracy,
timestamp=1267006115356, value=1317

  1264761195240/6ffc3fe659023 column=data:alt,
timestamp=1267006115356, value=0

  1264761195240/6ffc3fe659023 column=data:country,
timestamp=1267006115356, value=France

  1264761195240/6ffc3fe659023 column=data:countrycode,
timestamp=1267006115356, value=FR

  1264761195240/6ffc3fe659023 column=data:lat,
timestamp=1267006115356, value=48.65869706

  1264761195240/6ffc3fe659023 column=data:locality,
timestamp=1267006115356, value=Morsang-sur-Orge

  1264761195240/6ffc3fe659023 column=data:lon,
timestamp=1267006115356, value=2.36138182

  1264761195240/6ffc3fe659023 column=data:postalcode,
timestamp=1267006115356, value=91390

  1264761195240/6ffc3fe659023 column=data:region,
timestamp=1267006115356, value=Ile-de-France

  1264761195240/6ffc3fe659023 column=meta:imei,
timestamp=1267006115356, value=6ffc3fe659023a3c9cfed0a50a9f199e
  a3c9cfed0a50a9f199ed42f2730 d42f2730

  1264761195240/6ffc3fe659023 column=meta:infoid,
timestamp=1267006115356, value=ca30781e0c375a1236afbf323cbfa4
  a3c9cfed0a50a9f199ed42f2730 0dc2c7c7af

  1264761195240/6ffc3fe659023 column=meta:locid,
timestamp=1267006115356, value=5e15a0281e83cfe55ec1c362f84a39f
  a3c9cfed0a50a9f199ed42f2730 006f18128

  1264761195240/6ffc3fe659023 column=meta:timestamp,
timestamp=1267006115356, value=1264761195240
Maybe LZO works much better with fewer rows with bigger content?

Le 24/02/10 19:10, Jean-Daniel Cryans a �crit :
> Are you able to post the code used for the insertion? It could be
> something with your usage pattern or something wrong with the code
> itself.
> How many rows are you inserting? Do you even have some region splits?
> J-D
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 1:52 AM, Vincent Barat<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  wrote:
>> Yes of course.
>> We use a 4 machine cluster (4 large instances on AWS): 8 GB RAM each, dual
>> core CPU. 1 is for the Hadoop and HBase namenode / masters, and 3 are
>> hosting the datanode / regionservers.
>> The table used for testing is first created, then I insert sequentially a
>> set of rows and count the nb of rows inserted by second.
>> I insert rows by set of 1000 (using HTable.put(list<Put>);
>> When reading, I read also sequentially by using a scanner (scanner caching
>> is set to 1024 rows).
>> Maybe our installation of LZO is not good ?
>> Le 23/02/10 22:15, Jean-Daniel Cryans a �crit :
>>> Vincent,
>>> I don't expect that either, can you give us more info about your test
>>> environment?
>>> Thx,
>>> J-D
>>> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 10:39 AM, Vincent Barat
>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>    wrote:
>>>> Hello,
>>>> I did some testing to figure out which compression algo I should use for
>>>> my
>>>> HBase tables. I thought that LZO was the good candidate, but it appears