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 >> MemStore and prefix encoding


Copy link to this message
-
Re: MemStore and prefix encoding
I would still caution relying on the sorting order between values of the
same cf, qualifier and timestamp. If for example, there is a Delete, it
will eclipse subsequent Puts given the same timestamp, even though Put
happened after Delete.

Enis

On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 9:20 AM, Tom Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Lars,
>
> I have been relying on the expected behavior (if I write another cell
> with the same {key, family, qualifier, version} it won't return the
> previous one) so you're answer was confusing to me. I did more
> research and I found that the HBase guide specifies that behavior (see
> section 5.8.1 of http://hbase.apache.org/book.html).
>
> Have I misunderstood something? Can I rely on behavior that is
> specified in the guide?
>
> Thanks again!
>
> --Tom
>
> On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 6:43 AM, Eric Czech <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Thanks for the info lars!
> >
> > In the potential use case I have for writing at the same timestamp,
> > the values would always be the same anyways so I should be good.
> >
> > On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 9:12 PM, lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >> I checked the code to be sure...
> >>
> >>
> >> In ScanWildcardColumnTracker we have this:
> >>
> >>       if (sameAsPreviousTSAndType(timestamp, type)) {
> >>         return ScanQueryMatcher.MatchCode.SKIP;
> >>       }
> >>
> >>
> >> And in ExplicitColumnTracker there is this:
> >>
> >>         if (sameAsPreviousTS(timestamp)) {
> >>           //If duplicate, skip this Key
> >>           return ScanQueryMatcher.MatchCode.SKIP;
> >>         }
> >>
> >>
> >> I.e. the first KV is kept and the subsequent ones (with the same TS)
> are skipped.
> >>
> >> My point remains, though: Do not rely on this.
> >> (Though it will probably stay the way it is, because that is the most
> efficient way to handle this in forward only scanners.)
> >>
> >> -- Lars
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ________________________________
> >>  From: Tom Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; lars hofhansl <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2012 4:54 PM
> >> Subject: Re: MemStore and prefix encoding
> >>
> >>
> >> I thought when multiple values with the same key, family, qualifier and
> timestamps were written, the one that was written latest (as determined by
> position in the store) would be read. Is that not the case?
> >>
> >> --Tom
> >>
> >> On Saturday, August 25, 2012, lars hofhansl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >>> The prefix encoding applies to blocks in the HFiles and in the block
> cache, but not to the memstore.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> #1 Yes. Each column family is its own store. All stores are flushed
> together, so have many add overhead (especially if a few tend to hold a lot
> of data, but the others don't, leading to very many small store files that
> need to be compacted).
> >>> #2 There is only one key with the same key, column family, qualifier,
> and timestamp (if you write multiple with the same timestamp it is
> undefined which one you'll get back when you read the next time). So that
> does not make sense. Writes with the same key, column family, qualifier
> (each with a different timestamp) count towards the version limit.
> >>>
> >>> -- Lars
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>> From: Eric Czech <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>> To: user <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>> Cc:
> >>> Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2012 2:44 PM
> >>> Subject: MemStore and prefix encoding
> >>>
> >>> Hi everyone,
> >>>
> >>> Does prefix encoding apply to rows in MemStores or does it only apply
> >>> to rows on disk in HFiles?  I'm trying to decide if I should still
> >>> favor larger values in order to not repeat keys, column families, and
> >>> qualifiers more than necessary and while prefix encoding seems to
> >>> negate that concern for storage on disk, I'm not sure if it's still
> >>> applicable to in-memory storage.
> >>>
> >>> Also, I had two other quick (unrelated) questions and I assume it'd be
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