:) Yeah, sorry, wasn't clear. Your point is well taken, though, HBase should come configured and tuned out of the box for common workloads.
-- Lars ________________________________ From: Vladimir Rodionov <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>; lars hofhansl <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2013 12:01 AM Subject: Re: Next big thing for HBase Oh, I got it. "Next big thing for HBase" is not MapR M7 , but global optimization and tuning of HBase itself. On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 11:56 PM, Vladimir Rodionov <[email protected]>wrote: > Why do you think I got excited? I do not work for MapR. MapR has posted > benchmark results and some numbers for HBase look quite low. I thought may > be community will be interested in these results. > > > On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 10:04 PM, lars hofhansl <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Excuse me if I do not get too exited about a report published by MapR >> that comes to the conclusion that MapR's M7 is faster than "other >> distribution". >> >> -- Lars >> >> >> >> ________________________________ >> From: Vladimir Rodionov <[email protected]> >> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >> Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2013 8:00 PM >> Subject: Next big thing for HBase >> >> >> Global optimization and performance tuning: >> >> http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=19&ved=0CG8QFjAIOAo&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mapr.com%2FDownload-document%2F52-MapR-M7-Performance-Benchmark&ei=QGuVUr-cA6ewjAL_94DoCQ&usg=AFQjCNH2Brlp5n2rIAarEbj39c_X_lnvDg&sig2=bLTKxbspEgsRN3bJXUnspQ&bvm=bv.57155469,d.cGE&cad=rja >> >> Some numbers from this report does not look right for HBase. I do not >> believe that 5 RS on Fusion drive scores only 1605 reads per sec per node. >> > >
