S Ahmed 2013-01-22, 18:38
Where do you see that HBase is doing only 2-3k writes/s?
How was the data distributed? Was the table split?
Cassandra uses a random partitioner by default, which will nicely distribute the data over the cluster but won't allow to perform range scans over your data.
HBase always partitions by key ranges, so that the keys can the range scanned. If that is not done correctly and you create monotonically increasing keys, you'll hotspot a single region server.
Even then, you can do more than this on single RegionServer.
Also note that many of the benchmarks have agendas and cherry pick the results.
They probably "forgot" to disabled Nagle's and to distribute the table correctly.
From: S Ahmed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 10:38 AM
Subject: RE: write throughput in cassandra, understanding hbase
I've read articles online where I see cassandra doing like 20K writers per
second, and hbase around 2-3K.
I understand both systems have their strenghts, but I am curious as to what
is holding hbase from reaching similiar results?
Is it HDFS that is the issue? Or hbase does certain things (to its
advantage) that slows the write path down?
Kevin Odell 2013-01-22, 19:06
S Ahmed 2013-01-22, 19:12
Ian Varley 2013-01-22, 19:23
Andrew Purtell 2013-01-22, 19:32
Jean-Daniel Cryans 2013-01-22, 18:46
S Ahmed 2013-01-22, 19:01
Ted Yu 2013-01-22, 19:05
Asaf Mesika 2013-01-22, 20:57
anil gupta 2013-01-23, 07:08