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
Hadoop >> mail # user >> hbase and hypertable comparison


Copy link to this message
-
hbase and hypertable comparison
I'm planning to use a NoSQL distributed database.
I did some searching and came across a lot of database systems such as
MongoDB, CouchDB, Hbase, Cassandra, Hypertable, etc.

Since what I'll be doing is frequently reading a varying amount of data, and
less frequently writing a massive amount of data,
I thought Hbase, or Hypertable is the way to go.

I did some internet and found some performance comparison between HBase and
HyperTable.
Obviously HT dominated Hbase in every aspect (random read/write and a couple
of more)

But the comparison was made with Hbase 0.20.4, and Hbase had much
improvements since the current version is 0.90.3.

I am curious if the performance gap is still large between Hbase and HT.
I am running Hadoop already so I wanted to go with Hbase but the performance
gap was so big that it made me reconsider.

Any opinions please?
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