Another observation with Phoenix global indexes - at very large volumes of writes, a single region server failure cascades to the entire cluster very quickly
On Sat, Oct 27, 2018, 4:50 AM Nicolas Paris <nicolas.pa...@riseup.net> wrote: > Hi > > I am benchmarking phoenix to better understand its strength and > weaknesses. My basis is to compare to postgresql for OLTP workload and > hive llap for OLAP workload. I am testing on a 10 computer cluster > instance with hive (2.1) and phoenix (4.8) 220 GO RAM/32CPU versus a > postgresql (9.6) 128GO RAM 32CPU. > > Right now, my opinion is: > - when getting a subset on a large table, phoenix performs the > best > - when getting a subset from multiple large tables, postgres performs > the best > - when getting a subset from a large table joining one to many small > table, phoenix performs the best > - when ingesting high frequency data, Phoenix performs the best > - when grouping by query, hive > postgresql > phoenix > - when windowning, transforming, grouping, hive performs the best, > phoenix the worst > > Finally, my conclusion is phoenix is not intended at all for analytics > queries such grouping, windowing, and joining large tables. It suits > well for very specific use case like maintaining a very large table with > eventually small tables to join with (such timeseries data, or binary > storage data with hbase MOB enabled). > > Am I missing something ? > > Thanks, > > -- > nicolas >
