Hi, It's been asked before, but I didn't find any *definite* answers and a lot of answers I found via are from a whiiiile back.
e.g. Tsuna provided pretty convincing info here: http://search-hadoop.com/m/xAiiO8ttU2/%2522%2522I+generally+recommend+to+stick+to+a+single+table%2522&subj=Re+One+table+or+multiple+tables+ ... but that is from 3 years ago. Maybe things changed? Here's our use case: Data/table layout: * HBase is used for storing metrics at different granularities (1min, 5 min.... - a total of 6 different granularities) * It's a multi-tenant system * Keys are carefully crafted and include userId + number, where this number contains the time and the granularity * Everything's in 1 table and 1 CF Access: * We only access 1 system at a time, for a specific time range, and specific granularity * We periodically scan ALL data and delete data older than N days, where N varies from user to user * We periodically scan ALL data and merge multiple rows (of the same granularity) into 1 Question: Would there be any advantage in having 6 tables - one for each granularity - instead of having everything in 1 table? Assume each table would still have just 1 CF and the keys would remain the same. Thanks, Otis -- Monitoring * Alerting * Anomaly Detection * Centralized Log Management Solr & Elasticsearch Support * http://sematext.com/
