Hi José, I think your structure is ok to define HBase row keys. The main issue you`ll have then is row you`ll be able to build these keys, so that you can properly access your tree nodes.
Regarding your scalability concerns, you should not worry to start with a small Hadoop/Hbase cluster (even standalone) for development/concept proof purposes, but that definitely will require a more robust environment if you get to a billion of rows later. You'll have to start thinking on read/write load patterns, so that you'll be able to take the best advantage of HBase as your problem solution. Regards, Wellington. 2013/2/19 José Feiteirinha <j...@feiteira.org> > Dear all, > > I hope this is the right place for this question. > > I'm currently in the starting stages of developing a software that may > 'explode' in terms of users and data. I'm considering a very basic > tree-like data-structure and would like to know your thoughts regarding > HBase/Hadoop. > > My reason is that I would like to be prepared from the get-go for large > data. > > My structure is planned as such: > > - The data be nodes of a huge multidimensional tree. > - I'm planning on having each row containing the full node path, e.g. > "root.grandparentX.parentY.babyZ" (or ? "babyZ.parentY.grandparentX.root" ) > - However in terms of data per node, it should be pretty much static. > > > While this is a very simple structure, it does seem to be beneficial to > use HBase / Hadoop just for the scalability alone. I also understood that > if I get to billions of rows, only an HBase like approach can sustain me? > > My idea is to start with a simple standalone server and then expand the > cluster as the load & data grow. > > If you may, > I would like your thoughts, mostly regarding weather I'm using an Hammer > to kill Ants, my proposed data-structure or any other advice you may have. > > > Kind regards, > José > > -- > José Feiteirinha > > www.feiteira.org >