Thanks Josh I made a mistake in mentioning the master. It looks like the client contacts the Region Server which holds the Meta table.
Of a query into the meta table to get the RegionServer for a given key, it wasn't clear to me what was being cached on the client? Also on the same topic, is a Thrift server assisting this process in any shape or form? to make its presence necessary? Is there anything else that the Thrift server might be contributing to positively? ________________________________ From: Josh Elser <els...@apache.org> Sent: Monday, January 30, 2017 11:57 AM To: user@hbase.apache.org Subject: Re: Performance: HBase Native Java Client versus Thrift Java client Would recommend that you brush up on your understanding of the HBase architecture. Clients do not receive table data from the HBase Master at any point. This is purely a RegionServer operation. http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#_architecture jeff saremi wrote: > I'd like to understand if there are any considerations on why one would use > thrift versus the direct client? > > I was told that Thrift server allow key-caching which would result in faster > key-to-regionserver queries as opposed to getting that from the Hbase master > nodes. It would also alleviate the load on the master. > > At the same time, we know if going through Thrift would add to the latency > since it's an indirect way of getting at data. > > > thanks > > Jeff >
