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 # user >> Re: HBase vs. HDFS


Copy link to this message
-
Re: HBase vs. HDFS
You probably executed 120k next() RPC against your server, unless you enabled scanner caching.
(On a related note, we should probably not default this to 1, but something more sensible, like 10 or 100).
-- Lars
----- Original Message -----
From: Juan P. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
Sent: Monday, October 1, 2012 4:01 PM
Subject: HBase vs. HDFS

Hi guys,
I'm trying to get familiarized with HBase and one thing I noticed is that
reads seem to very slow. I just tried doing a "scan 'my_table'" to get 120K
records and it took about 50 seconds to print it all out.

In contrast "hadoop fs -cat my_file.csv" where my_file.csv has 120K lines
completed in under a second.

Is that possible? Am I missing something about HBase reads?

Thanks,
Joni
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