Re: hbase and hypertable comparison
Thanks for the clear answer Andy. The comparison actually was conducted by hypertable dev team, so I guess it wasn't all that fair to hbase. I have regained the confidence in hbase once more :) Ed From mp2893's iPhone On 2011. 5. 26., at 오전 12:03, Andrew Purtell wrote: > I think I can speak for all of the HBase devs that in our opinion this vendor > "benchmark" was designed by hypertable to demonstrate a specific feature of > their system -- autotuning -- in such a way that HBase was, obviously, not > tuned. Nobody from the HBase project was consulted on the results or to do > such tuning, as is common courtesy when running a competitive benchmark, if > the goal is a fair test. Furthermore the "benchmark" code was not a community > accepted benchmark such as YCSB. > > I do not think the results are valid beyond being some vendor FUD and do not > warrant much comment beyond this. > > Best regards, > >- Andy > > Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via > Tom White) > > > --- On Wed, 5/25/11, edward choi wrote: > >> From: edward choi >> Subject: hbase and hypertable comparison >> To: u...@hbase.apache.org, common-user@hadoop.apache.org >> Date: Wednesday, May 25, 2011, 12:47 AM >> I'm planning to use a NoSQL >> distributed database. >> I did some searching and came across a lot of database >> systems such as >> MongoDB, CouchDB, Hbase, Cassandra, Hypertable, etc. >> >> Since what I'll be doing is frequently reading a varying >> amount of data, and >> less frequently writing a massive amount of data, >> I thought Hbase, or Hypertable is the way to go. >> >> I did some internet and found some performance comparison >> between HBase and >> HyperTable. >> Obviously HT dominated Hbase in every aspect (random >> read/write and a couple >> of more) >> >> But the comparison was made with Hbase 0.20.4, and Hbase >> had much >> improvements since the current version is 0.90.3. >> >> I am curious if the performance gap is still large between >> Hbase and HT. >> I am running Hadoop already so I wanted to go with Hbase >> but the performance >> gap was so big that it made me reconsider. >> >> Any opinions please? >>
Re: hbase and hypertable comparison
I think I can speak for all of the HBase devs that in our opinion this vendor "benchmark" was designed by hypertable to demonstrate a specific feature of their system -- autotuning -- in such a way that HBase was, obviously, not tuned. Nobody from the HBase project was consulted on the results or to do such tuning, as is common courtesy when running a competitive benchmark, if the goal is a fair test. Furthermore the "benchmark" code was not a community accepted benchmark such as YCSB. I do not think the results are valid beyond being some vendor FUD and do not warrant much comment beyond this. Best regards, - Andy Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via Tom White) --- On Wed, 5/25/11, edward choi wrote: > From: edward choi > Subject: hbase and hypertable comparison > To: u...@hbase.apache.org, common-user@hadoop.apache.org > Date: Wednesday, May 25, 2011, 12:47 AM > I'm planning to use a NoSQL > distributed database. > I did some searching and came across a lot of database > systems such as > MongoDB, CouchDB, Hbase, Cassandra, Hypertable, etc. > > Since what I'll be doing is frequently reading a varying > amount of data, and > less frequently writing a massive amount of data, > I thought Hbase, or Hypertable is the way to go. > > I did some internet and found some performance comparison > between HBase and > HyperTable. > Obviously HT dominated Hbase in every aspect (random > read/write and a couple > of more) > > But the comparison was made with Hbase 0.20.4, and Hbase > had much > improvements since the current version is 0.90.3. > > I am curious if the performance gap is still large between > Hbase and HT. > I am running Hadoop already so I wanted to go with Hbase > but the performance > gap was so big that it made me reconsider. > > Any opinions please? >
hbase and hypertable comparison
I'm planning to use a NoSQL distributed database. I did some searching and came across a lot of database systems such as MongoDB, CouchDB, Hbase, Cassandra, Hypertable, etc. Since what I'll be doing is frequently reading a varying amount of data, and less frequently writing a massive amount of data, I thought Hbase, or Hypertable is the way to go. I did some internet and found some performance comparison between HBase and HyperTable. Obviously HT dominated Hbase in every aspect (random read/write and a couple of more) But the comparison was made with Hbase 0.20.4, and Hbase had much improvements since the current version is 0.90.3. I am curious if the performance gap is still large between Hbase and HT. I am running Hadoop already so I wanted to go with Hbase but the performance gap was so big that it made me reconsider. Any opinions please?
