He didn't ask just about security, FWIW
"I am looking for real gap comparing HBase to Accumulo if there is any
so that I can be prepared to address them. This is not limited to the
security area."
Sean Busbey wrote:
Let's please stick to the topic Jerry asked about: security features.
We can get into all sorts of discussions around scalability and read/write
performance in a different joint thread if folks want. We all have lots of
Opinions (and the YCSB community would love to see more of y'all show up to
improve it's suitability for comparing things ;) ). However, I think we're
all in agreement that both systems scale "well enough" for the vast
majority of use cases.
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 1:37 PM, Ted Malaska<ted.mala...@cloudera.com>
wrote:
Sorry Type-o
So there might be issues when you pass the Quadrillion. But Like I said
never ran into that issue of region limits.
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Ted Malaska<ted.mala...@cloudera.com>
wrote:
Sorry 10 billion a day so that is 7 Trillion records. So many issues
around 1000 Trillion
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Ted Malaska<ted.mala...@cloudera.com>
wrote:
I've been doing HBase for a long time and never had an issue with region
count limits and I have clusters with 10s of billions of records. Many
there would be issues around a couple Trillion records, but never got
that
high yet.
Ted Malaska
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 2:24 PM, Josh Elser<josh.el...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Oh, one other thing that I should mention (was prompted off-list).
(definition time since cross-list now: HBase regions == Accumulo
tablets)
Accumulo will handle many more regions than HBase does now due to a
splittable metadata table. While I was told this was a very long and
arduous journey to implement correctly (WRT splitting, merges and bulk
loading), users with "too many regions" problems are extremely few and
far
between for Accumulo.
I was very happy to see effort/design being put into this in HBase.
And,
just to be fair in criticism/praises, HBase does appear to me to do
assignments of regions much faster than Accumulo does on a small
cluster
(~5-10 nodes). Accumulo may take a few seconds to notice and reassign
tablets. I have yet to notice this with HBase (which also could be due
to
lack of personal testing).
Jerry He wrote:
Hi, folks
We have people that are evaluating HBase vs Accumulo.
Security is an important factor.
But I think after the Cell security was added in HBase, there is no
more
real gap compared to Accumulo.
I know we have both HBase and Accumulo experts on this list.
Could someone shred more light?
I am looking for real gap comparing HBase to Accumulo if there is any
so
that I can be prepared to address them. This is not limited to the
security
area.
There are differences in some features and implementations. But they
don't
see like real 'gaps'.
Any comments and feedbacks are welcome.
Thanks,
Jerry
