Well, write performance is also important... I'll probably ingest 1k~10k records/second.
Jianshi On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 1:11 AM, Jianshi Huang <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Ted, > > Yes, that's the table having RegionTooBusyExceptions :) But the > performance I care most are scan performance. > > It's mostly for analytics, so I don't care much about atomicity currently. > > What's your suggestion? > > Jianshi > > > On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 1:08 AM, Ted Yu <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Is this the same table you mentioned in the thread about >> RegionTooBusyException >> ? >> >> If you move the column family to another table, you may have to handle >> atomicity yourself - currently atomic operations are within region >> boundaries. >> >> Cheers >> >> >> On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 9:49 AM, Jianshi Huang <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > Hi, >> > >> > I'm currently putting everything into one table (to make cross reference >> > queries easier) and there's one CF which contains rowkeys very >> different to >> > the rest. Currently it works well, but I'm wondering if it will cause >> > performance issues in the future. >> > >> > So my questions are >> > >> > 1) will there be performance penalties in the way I'm doing? >> > 2) should I move that CF to a separate table? >> > >> > >> > Thanks, >> > -- >> > Jianshi Huang >> > >> > LinkedIn: jianshi >> > Twitter: @jshuang >> > Github & Blog: http://huangjs.github.com/ >> > >> > > > > -- > Jianshi Huang > > LinkedIn: jianshi > Twitter: @jshuang > Github & Blog: http://huangjs.github.com/ > -- Jianshi Huang LinkedIn: jianshi Twitter: @jshuang Github & Blog: http://huangjs.github.com/
