Mohammad Tariq 2013-01-28, 11:45
Viral Bajaria 2013-01-28, 11:52
Mohammad Tariq 2013-01-28, 11:55
ramkrishna vasudevan 2013-01-28, 12:05
Mohammad Tariq 2013-01-28, 12:17
Jean-Marc Spaggiari 2013-01-28, 12:27
Mohammad Tariq 2013-01-28, 14:53
-Re: Indexing Hbase Data
Jean-Marc Spaggiari 2013-01-29, 20:49
I think I understand what you are trying to do, but I'm not really
sure there is a faster way. All the access you are doing are direct.
There is no scan. You have a direct access to look into you clauses
table, then you have another direct access based on what you found
For you miles vs meters example, you access the distance you "simply"
need to have another reference table which gives you the conversion
rules. You have keys like "milesmiles" (value=1), "metersmiles"
(value=0.000621371) "milesmeters" (value=1609.34). Based on the
standard unit and what is entered you lookup for the convertion rate
into this table based on the unit of the value been put (meters) and
the standard (miles) which gives you the key (metersmiles). So each
time someone want to insert something, you lookup at the conversion
table before inserting it.
I just hope you will have hundred of thousands of conversion types
because HBase might not be the best fit for few entries only.
2013/1/28, Mohammad Tariq <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hello Jean,
> Actually it's to read the values faster. The problem goes like
> this :
> I have a table that has just 2 columns : 1- Stores some clause.
> 2- Stores all
> possible aliases for the original clause.
> These clauses are again 'column names' for another table.
> Now, a user can insert a value using any of the aliases or using
> the original name of a clause. If he/she gives the actual name I can put
> the value there directly into the main table which holds the data. And, if
> the user gives an alias instead of the actual clause name, I have to get
> the actual clause name first name from this table and then put the data
> into the main table.
> So, this table basically holds only the mappings. But the actual data has
> to stored into some other table. If I am not able to get hold of this
> mapping stuff quickly there would be a lot of overhead while putting the
> data and my puts might eventually fail.
> For example :
> My main table has a column, say "distance" and another column, say "units".
> Now, a user wants to insert a distance value as "miles" or as "meters".
> Considering "miles" as the standard unit, if a user inserts the distance in
> "miles", I can put it as it is. But if the user tries to insert the
> distance in "meters", I have to first find out that meters actually mean
> miles and I have to put the value into the distance column after converting
> it into miles.
> I hope I was able to explain the problem properly ;)
> Warm Regards,
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Jean-Marc Spaggiari <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hi Mohammad,
>> I don't really see how you can get faster results than indexing the
>> content as the row key in another table. Access is direct after that.
>> What do you mean with "faster resuls"? To build the index? Or to read
>> through it?
>> 2013/1/28, Mohammad Tariq <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> > Thank you for the valuable reply sir. Actually I tried that and it
>> > works
>> > fine. But we need faster results. I was thinking of creating an index
>> > and
>> > have it loaded in the memory, at all times. so that fetches are faster.
>> > there any OOTB feature available in co-proc?
>> > Warm Regards,
>> > Tariq
>> > https://mtariq.jux.com/
>> > cloudfront.blogspot.com
>> > On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 5:35 PM, ramkrishna vasudevan <
>> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >> As a POC, just try to load the data into another table that has the
>> >> rowkey
>> >> that has the original row's value.
>> >> Try to scan the index table first and then get the main table row key.
>> >> First this should help, later can make this more better by using
>> >> coprocessors.
>> >> Regards
>> >> Ram
>> >> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 5:25 PM, Mohammad Tariq <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>