[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-3411?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14554521#comment-14554521 ]
Vrushali C commented on YARN-3411: ---------------------------------- Hi [~djp] I understand your point. The schema between the two approaches is quite different, not just from the row key perspective. [~gtCarrera9] I am wondering why is flow version part of the row key? Does it need to be or it can be a column in Phoenix? thanks Vrushali > [Storage implementation] explore the native HBase write schema for storage > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: YARN-3411 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YARN-3411 > Project: Hadoop YARN > Issue Type: Sub-task > Components: timelineserver > Reporter: Sangjin Lee > Assignee: Vrushali C > Priority: Critical > Attachments: ATSv2BackendHBaseSchemaproposal.pdf, > YARN-3411-YARN-2928.001.patch, YARN-3411-YARN-2928.002.patch, > YARN-3411-YARN-2928.003.patch, YARN-3411-YARN-2928.004.patch, > YARN-3411-YARN-2928.005.patch, YARN-3411-YARN-2928.006.patch, > YARN-3411-YARN-2928.007.patch, YARN-3411.poc.2.txt, YARN-3411.poc.3.txt, > YARN-3411.poc.4.txt, YARN-3411.poc.5.txt, YARN-3411.poc.6.txt, > YARN-3411.poc.7.txt, YARN-3411.poc.txt > > > There is work that's in progress to implement the storage based on a Phoenix > schema (YARN-3134). > In parallel, we would like to explore an implementation based on a native > HBase schema for the write path. Such a schema does not exclude using > Phoenix, especially for reads and offline queries. > Once we have basic implementations of both options, we could evaluate them in > terms of performance, scalability, usability, etc. and make a call. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)