[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-4811?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13801449#comment-13801449 ]
Jean-Marc Spaggiari commented on HBASE-4811: -------------------------------------------- With reads now: || ||0.94.12 patched||0.94.12||Diff|| |org.apache.hadoop.hbase.PerformanceEvaluation$FilteredScanTest|0.62|10.55|99.34%| |org.apache.hadoop.hbase.PerformanceEvaluation$RandomReadTest|817.73|824.11|100.78%| |org.apache.hadoop.hbase.PerformanceEvaluation$RandomSeekScanTest|259.12|257.10|99.22%| |org.apache.hadoop.hbase.PerformanceEvaluation$RandomScanWithRange10Test|27966.00|27720.00|99.12%| |org.apache.hadoop.hbase.PerformanceEvaluation$RandomScanWithRange1000Test|2384.00|2364.00|99.16%| Basically, almost no difference between the 2. I'm running in StandAlone on SSD. I can run in pseudo-dist with 3 disks if you want. JM > Support reverse Scan > -------------------- > > Key: HBASE-4811 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-4811 > Project: HBase > Issue Type: New Feature > Components: Client > Affects Versions: 0.20.6, 0.94.7 > Reporter: John Carrino > Assignee: chunhui shen > Fix For: 0.98.0, 0.94.13, 0.96.1 > > Attachments: 4811-0.94-v22.txt, 4811-0.94-v3.txt, 4811-trunk-v10.txt, > 4811-trunk-v5.patch, HBase-4811-0.94.3modified.txt, hbase-4811-0.94 > v21.patch, HBase-4811-0.94-v2.txt, hbase-4811-trunkv11.patch, > hbase-4811-trunkv12.patch, hbase-4811-trunkv13.patch, > hbase-4811-trunkv14.patch, hbase-4811-trunkv15.patch, > hbase-4811-trunkv16.patch, hbase-4811-trunkv17.patch, > hbase-4811-trunkv18.patch, hbase-4811-trunkv19.patch, > hbase-4811-trunkv1.patch, hbase-4811-trunkv20.patch, > hbase-4811-trunkv21.patch, hbase-4811-trunkv4.patch, > hbase-4811-trunkv6.patch, hbase-4811-trunkv7.patch, hbase-4811-trunkv8.patch, > hbase-4811-trunkv9.patch > > > Reversed scan means scan the rows backward. > And StartRow bigger than StopRow in a reversed scan. > For example, for the following rows: > aaa/c1:q1/value1 > aaa/c1:q2/value2 > bbb/c1:q1/value1 > bbb/c1:q2/value2 > ccc/c1:q1/value1 > ccc/c1:q2/value2 > ddd/c1:q1/value1 > ddd/c1:q2/value2 > eee/c1:q1/value1 > eee/c1:q2/value2 > you could do a reversed scan from 'ddd' to 'bbb'(exclude) like this: > Scan scan = new Scan(); > scan.setStartRow('ddd'); > scan.setStopRow('bbb'); > scan.setReversed(true); > for(Result result:htable.getScanner(scan)){ > System.out.println(result); > } > Aslo you could do the reversed scan with shell like this: > hbase> scan 'table',{REVERSED => true,STARTROW=>'ddd', STOPROW=>'bbb'} > And the output is: > ddd/c1:q1/value1 > ddd/c1:q2/value2 > ccc/c1:q1/value1 > ccc/c1:q2/value2 > NOTE: when setting reversed as true for a client scan, you must set the start > row, else will throw exception. Through {@link > Scan#createBiggestByteArray(int)},you could get a big enough byte array as > the start row > All the documentation I find about HBase says that if you want forward and > reverse scans you should just build 2 tables and one be ascending and one > descending. Is there a fundamental reason that HBase only supports forward > Scan? It seems like a lot of extra space overhead and coding overhead (to > keep them in sync) to support 2 tables. > I am assuming this has been discussed before, but I can't find the > discussions anywhere about it or why it would be infeasible. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.1#6144)