Does HBASE-3584 also allow buffering of the mutations? (With the 0.90 branch it is only possible to buffer Put operations).
On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 1:50 AM, lars hofhansl <lhofha...@yahoo.com> wrote: > I'll let the Cloudera folks speak, but I has assumed CDH4 would include > HBase 0.94. > > -- Lars > > > > ________________________________ > From: Ted Yu <yuzhih...@gmail.com> > To: user@hbase.apache.org > Sent: Thursday, July 5, 2012 11:28 AM > Subject: Re: Mixing Puts and Deletes in a single RPC > > Take a look at HBASE-3584: Allow atomic put/delete in one call > It is in 0.94, meaning it is not even in cdh4 > > Cheers > > On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 11:19 AM, Keith Wyss <keith.w...@explorys.com> > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > My organization has been doing something zany to simulate atomic row > > operations is HBase. > > > > We have a converter-object model for the writables that are populated in > > an HBase table, and one of the governing assumptions > > is that if you are dealing with an Object record, you read all the > columns > > that compose it out of HBase or a different data source. > > > > When we read lots of data in from a source system that we are trying to > > mirror with HBase, if a column is null that means that whatever is > > in HBase for that column is no longer valid. We have simulated what I > > believe is now called a AtomicRowMutation by using a single Put > > and populating it with blanks. The downside is the wasted space accrued > by > > the metadata for the blank columns. > > > > Atomicity is not of utmost importance to us, but performance is. My > > approach has been to create a Put and Delete object for a record and > > populate the Delete with the null columns. Then we call > > HTable.batch(List<Row>) on a bunch of these. It is my impression that > this > > shouldn't appreciably increase network traffic as the RPC calls will be > > bundled. > > > > Has anyone else addressed this problem? Does this seem like a reasonable > > approach? > > What sort of performance overhead should I expect? > > > > Also, I've seen some Jira tickets about making this an atomic operation > in > > its own right. Is that something that > > I can expect with CDH3U4? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Keith Wyss > > >
