You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@hbase.apache.org by Neil Yalowitz <ne...@gmail.com> on 2012/10/16 23:53:30 UTC
crafting your key - scan vs. get
Hopefully this is a fun question. :)
Assume you could architect an HBase table from scratch and you were
choosing between the following two key structures.
1)
The first structure creates a unique row key for each PUT. The rows are
events related to a user ID. There may be up to several hundred events for
each user ID (probably not thousands, an average of perhaps ~100 events per
user). Each key would be made unique with a reverse-order-timestamp or
perhaps just random characters (we don't particularly care about using ROT
for sorting newest here).
key
----
AAAAAA + some-unique-chars
The table will look like this:
key vals cf:mycf ts
-------------------------------------------------------------------
AAAAAA9999... myval1 1350345600
AAAAAA8888... myval2 1350259200
AAAAAA7777... myval3 1350172800
Retrieving these values will use a Scan with startRow and stopRow. In
hbase shell, it would look like:
$ scan 'mytable',{STARTROW=>'AAAAAA', ENDROW=>'AAAAAA_'}
2)
The second structure choice uses only the user ID as the key and relies on
row versions to store all the events. For example:
key vals cf:mycf ts
---------------------------------------------------------------------
AAAAAA myval1 1350345600
AAAAAA myval2 1350259200
AAAAAA myval3 1350172800
Retrieving these values will use a Get with VERSIONS = somebignumber. In
hbase shell, it would look like:
$ get 'mytable','AAAAAA',{COLUMN=>'cf:mycf', VERSIONS=>999}
...although this probably violates a comment in the HBase documentation:
"It is not recommended setting the number of max versions to an exceedingly
high level (e.g., hundreds or more) unless those old values are very dear
to you because this will greatly increase StoreFile size."
...found here: http://hbase.apache.org/book/schema.versions.html
So, are there any performance considerations between Scan vs. Get in this
use case? Which choice would you go for?
Neil Yalowitz
neilyalowitz@gmail.com
Re: crafting your key - scan vs. get
Posted by Michael Segel <mi...@hotmail.com>.
Neil,
I've pointed you in the right direction.
The rest of the exercise is left to the student. :-)
While you used the comment about having fun, your question is boring. *^1
The fun part is for you now to play and see why I may have suggested the importance of column order.
Sorry, but that really is the fun part of your question... figuring out the rest of the answer on your own.
From your response, you clearly understand it, but you need to spend more time wrapping your head around the solution and taking ownership of it.
Have fun,
-Mike
*^1 The reason I say that the question is boring is that once you fully understand the problem and the solution, you can easily apply it to other problems. The fun is in actually taking the time to experiment and work through the problem on your own. Seriously, that *is* the fun part.
On Oct 17, 2012, at 10:53 PM, Neil Yalowitz <ne...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This is a helpful response, thanks. Our use case fits the "Show me the
> most recent events by user A" you described.
>
> So using the first example, a table populated with events of user ID AAAAAA.
>
> ROW COLUMN+CELL
>
>
> AAAAAA
> column=data:event9999, timestamp=1350420705459, value=myeventval1
>
>
> AAAAAA
> column=data:event9998, timestamp=1350420704490, value=myeventval2
>
>
> AAAAAA
> column=data:event9997, timestamp=1350420704567, value=myeventval3
>
> NOTE1: I replaced the TS stuff with 9999...9997 for brevity, and the
> example user ID "AAAAAA" would actually be hashed to avoid hotspotting
> NOTE2: I assume I should shorten the chosen column family and qualifier
> before writing it to a large production table (for instance, d instead of
> data and e instead of event)
>
> I hope I have that right. Thanks for the response!
>
> As for including enough description for the question to be "not-boring,"
> I'm never quite sure when an email will grow so long that no one will read
> it. :) So to give more background: Each event is about 1KB of data. The
> frequency is highly variable... over any given period of time, some users
> may only log one event and no more, some users may log a few events (10 to
> 100), in some rare cases a user may log many events (1000+). The width of
> the column is some concern for the users with many events, but I'm thinking
> a few rare rows with 1KB x 1000+ width shouldn't kill us.
>
> If I may ask a couple of followup question about your comments:
>
>> Then store each event in a separate column where the column name is
> something like "event" + (max Long - Time Stamp) .
>>
>> This will place the most recent event first.
>
> Although I know row keys are sorted, I'm not sure what this means for a
> qualifier. The scan result can depend on what cf:qual is used? ...and
> that determines which column value is "first"? Is this related to using
> setMaxResultsPerColumnFamily(1)? (ie-- only return one column value, so
> sort on qualifier and return the first val found)
>
>> The reason I say "event" + the long, is that you may want to place user
> specific information in a column and you would want to make sure it was in
> front of the event data.
>
> Same question as above, I'm not sure what would place a column "in front."
> Am I missing something?
>
>> In the first case, you can use get() while still a scan, its a very
> efficient fetch.
>> In the second, you will always need to do a scan.
>
> This is the core of my original question. My anecdotal tests in hbase
> shell showed a Get executing about 3x faster than a Scan with
> start/stoprow, but I don't trust my crude testing much and hoped someone
> could describe the performance trade-off between Scan vs. Get.
>
>
> Thanks again for anyone who read this far.
>
>
> Neil Yalowitz
> neilyalowitz@gmail.com
>
> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Michael Segel
> <mi...@hotmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Neil,
>>
>>
>> Since you asked....
>> Actually your question is kind of a boring question. ;-) [Note I will
>> probably get flamed for saying it, even if it is the truth!]
>>
>> Having said that...
>> Boring as it is, its an important topic that many still seem to trivialize
>> in terms of its impact on performance.
>>
>> Before answering your question, lets take a step back and ask a more
>> important question...
>> "What data do you to capture and store in HBase?"
>> and then ask yourself...
>> "How do I plan on accessing the data?"
>>
>> From what I can tell, you want to track certain events made by a user.
>> So you're recording at Time X, user A did something.
>>
>> Then the question is how do you want to access the data.
>>
>> Do you primarily say "Show me all the events in the past 15 minutes and
>> organize them by user?"
>> Or do you say "Show me the most recent events by user A" ?
>>
>> Here's the issue.
>>
>> If you are more interested and will frequently ask the question of "Show
>> me the most recent events by user A",
>>
>> Then you would want to do the following:
>> Key = User ID (hashed if necessary)
>> Column Family: Data (For lack of a better name)
>>
>> Then store each event in a separate column where the column name is
>> something like "event" + (max Long - Time Stamp) .
>>
>> This will place the most recent event first.
>>
>> The reason I say "event" + the long, is that you may want to place user
>> specific information in a column and you would want to make sure it was in
>> front of the event data.
>>
>> Now if your access pattern was more along the lines of show me the events
>> that occurred in the past 15 minutes, then you would use the time stamp and
>> then have to worry about hot spotting and region splits. But then you could
>> get your data from a simple start/stop row scan.
>>
>> In the first case, you can use get() while still a scan, its a very
>> efficient fetch.
>> In the second, you will always need to do a scan.
>>
>> Having said that, there are other things to think about including
>> frequency and how wide your rows will get over time.
>> (Mainly in terms of the first example I gave.)
>>
>> The reason I said that your question is boring is that its been asked
>> numerous times and every time its asked, the initial question doesn't
>> provide enough information to actually give a good answer...
>>
>> HTH
>>
>> -Mike
>>
>>
>>
>> On Oct 16, 2012, at 4:53 PM, Neil Yalowitz <ne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hopefully this is a fun question. :)
>>>
>>> Assume you could architect an HBase table from scratch and you were
>>> choosing between the following two key structures.
>>>
>>> 1)
>>>
>>> The first structure creates a unique row key for each PUT. The rows are
>>> events related to a user ID. There may be up to several hundred events
>> for
>>> each user ID (probably not thousands, an average of perhaps ~100 events
>> per
>>> user). Each key would be made unique with a reverse-order-timestamp or
>>> perhaps just random characters (we don't particularly care about using
>> ROT
>>> for sorting newest here).
>>>
>>> key
>>> ----
>>> AAAAAA + some-unique-chars
>>>
>>> The table will look like this:
>>>
>>> key vals cf:mycf ts
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> AAAAAA9999... myval1 1350345600
>>> AAAAAA8888... myval2 1350259200
>>> AAAAAA7777... myval3 1350172800
>>>
>>>
>>> Retrieving these values will use a Scan with startRow and stopRow. In
>>> hbase shell, it would look like:
>>>
>>> $ scan 'mytable',{STARTROW=>'AAAAAA', ENDROW=>'AAAAAA_'}
>>>
>>>
>>> 2)
>>>
>>> The second structure choice uses only the user ID as the key and relies
>> on
>>> row versions to store all the events. For example:
>>>
>>> key vals cf:mycf ts
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> AAAAAA myval1 1350345600
>>> AAAAAA myval2 1350259200
>>> AAAAAA myval3 1350172800
>>>
>>> Retrieving these values will use a Get with VERSIONS = somebignumber. In
>>> hbase shell, it would look like:
>>>
>>> $ get 'mytable','AAAAAA',{COLUMN=>'cf:mycf', VERSIONS=>999}
>>>
>>> ...although this probably violates a comment in the HBase documentation:
>>>
>>> "It is not recommended setting the number of max versions to an
>> exceedingly
>>> high level (e.g., hundreds or more) unless those old values are very dear
>>> to you because this will greatly increase StoreFile size."
>>>
>>> ...found here: http://hbase.apache.org/book/schema.versions.html
>>>
>>>
>>> So, are there any performance considerations between Scan vs. Get in this
>>> use case? Which choice would you go for?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Neil Yalowitz
>>> neilyalowitz@gmail.com
>>
>>
Re: crafting your key - scan vs. get
Posted by Neil Yalowitz <ne...@gmail.com>.
This is a helpful response, thanks. Our use case fits the "Show me the
most recent events by user A" you described.
So using the first example, a table populated with events of user ID AAAAAA.
ROW COLUMN+CELL
AAAAAA
column=data:event9999, timestamp=1350420705459, value=myeventval1
AAAAAA
column=data:event9998, timestamp=1350420704490, value=myeventval2
AAAAAA
column=data:event9997, timestamp=1350420704567, value=myeventval3
NOTE1: I replaced the TS stuff with 9999...9997 for brevity, and the
example user ID "AAAAAA" would actually be hashed to avoid hotspotting
NOTE2: I assume I should shorten the chosen column family and qualifier
before writing it to a large production table (for instance, d instead of
data and e instead of event)
I hope I have that right. Thanks for the response!
As for including enough description for the question to be "not-boring,"
I'm never quite sure when an email will grow so long that no one will read
it. :) So to give more background: Each event is about 1KB of data. The
frequency is highly variable... over any given period of time, some users
may only log one event and no more, some users may log a few events (10 to
100), in some rare cases a user may log many events (1000+). The width of
the column is some concern for the users with many events, but I'm thinking
a few rare rows with 1KB x 1000+ width shouldn't kill us.
If I may ask a couple of followup question about your comments:
> Then store each event in a separate column where the column name is
something like "event" + (max Long - Time Stamp) .
>
> This will place the most recent event first.
Although I know row keys are sorted, I'm not sure what this means for a
qualifier. The scan result can depend on what cf:qual is used? ...and
that determines which column value is "first"? Is this related to using
setMaxResultsPerColumnFamily(1)? (ie-- only return one column value, so
sort on qualifier and return the first val found)
> The reason I say "event" + the long, is that you may want to place user
specific information in a column and you would want to make sure it was in
front of the event data.
Same question as above, I'm not sure what would place a column "in front."
Am I missing something?
> In the first case, you can use get() while still a scan, its a very
efficient fetch.
> In the second, you will always need to do a scan.
This is the core of my original question. My anecdotal tests in hbase
shell showed a Get executing about 3x faster than a Scan with
start/stoprow, but I don't trust my crude testing much and hoped someone
could describe the performance trade-off between Scan vs. Get.
Thanks again for anyone who read this far.
Neil Yalowitz
neilyalowitz@gmail.com
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 10:45 AM, Michael Segel
<mi...@hotmail.com>wrote:
> Neil,
>
>
> Since you asked....
> Actually your question is kind of a boring question. ;-) [Note I will
> probably get flamed for saying it, even if it is the truth!]
>
> Having said that...
> Boring as it is, its an important topic that many still seem to trivialize
> in terms of its impact on performance.
>
> Before answering your question, lets take a step back and ask a more
> important question...
> "What data do you to capture and store in HBase?"
> and then ask yourself...
> "How do I plan on accessing the data?"
>
> From what I can tell, you want to track certain events made by a user.
> So you're recording at Time X, user A did something.
>
> Then the question is how do you want to access the data.
>
> Do you primarily say "Show me all the events in the past 15 minutes and
> organize them by user?"
> Or do you say "Show me the most recent events by user A" ?
>
> Here's the issue.
>
> If you are more interested and will frequently ask the question of "Show
> me the most recent events by user A",
>
> Then you would want to do the following:
> Key = User ID (hashed if necessary)
> Column Family: Data (For lack of a better name)
>
> Then store each event in a separate column where the column name is
> something like "event" + (max Long - Time Stamp) .
>
> This will place the most recent event first.
>
> The reason I say "event" + the long, is that you may want to place user
> specific information in a column and you would want to make sure it was in
> front of the event data.
>
> Now if your access pattern was more along the lines of show me the events
> that occurred in the past 15 minutes, then you would use the time stamp and
> then have to worry about hot spotting and region splits. But then you could
> get your data from a simple start/stop row scan.
>
> In the first case, you can use get() while still a scan, its a very
> efficient fetch.
> In the second, you will always need to do a scan.
>
> Having said that, there are other things to think about including
> frequency and how wide your rows will get over time.
> (Mainly in terms of the first example I gave.)
>
> The reason I said that your question is boring is that its been asked
> numerous times and every time its asked, the initial question doesn't
> provide enough information to actually give a good answer...
>
> HTH
>
> -Mike
>
>
>
> On Oct 16, 2012, at 4:53 PM, Neil Yalowitz <ne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hopefully this is a fun question. :)
> >
> > Assume you could architect an HBase table from scratch and you were
> > choosing between the following two key structures.
> >
> > 1)
> >
> > The first structure creates a unique row key for each PUT. The rows are
> > events related to a user ID. There may be up to several hundred events
> for
> > each user ID (probably not thousands, an average of perhaps ~100 events
> per
> > user). Each key would be made unique with a reverse-order-timestamp or
> > perhaps just random characters (we don't particularly care about using
> ROT
> > for sorting newest here).
> >
> > key
> > ----
> > AAAAAA + some-unique-chars
> >
> > The table will look like this:
> >
> > key vals cf:mycf ts
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------
> > AAAAAA9999... myval1 1350345600
> > AAAAAA8888... myval2 1350259200
> > AAAAAA7777... myval3 1350172800
> >
> >
> > Retrieving these values will use a Scan with startRow and stopRow. In
> > hbase shell, it would look like:
> >
> > $ scan 'mytable',{STARTROW=>'AAAAAA', ENDROW=>'AAAAAA_'}
> >
> >
> > 2)
> >
> > The second structure choice uses only the user ID as the key and relies
> on
> > row versions to store all the events. For example:
> >
> > key vals cf:mycf ts
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > AAAAAA myval1 1350345600
> > AAAAAA myval2 1350259200
> > AAAAAA myval3 1350172800
> >
> > Retrieving these values will use a Get with VERSIONS = somebignumber. In
> > hbase shell, it would look like:
> >
> > $ get 'mytable','AAAAAA',{COLUMN=>'cf:mycf', VERSIONS=>999}
> >
> > ...although this probably violates a comment in the HBase documentation:
> >
> > "It is not recommended setting the number of max versions to an
> exceedingly
> > high level (e.g., hundreds or more) unless those old values are very dear
> > to you because this will greatly increase StoreFile size."
> >
> > ...found here: http://hbase.apache.org/book/schema.versions.html
> >
> >
> > So, are there any performance considerations between Scan vs. Get in this
> > use case? Which choice would you go for?
> >
> >
> >
> > Neil Yalowitz
> > neilyalowitz@gmail.com
>
>
Re: crafting your key - scan vs. get
Posted by Michael Segel <mi...@hotmail.com>.
Neil,
Since you asked....
Actually your question is kind of a boring question. ;-) [Note I will probably get flamed for saying it, even if it is the truth!]
Having said that...
Boring as it is, its an important topic that many still seem to trivialize in terms of its impact on performance.
Before answering your question, lets take a step back and ask a more important question...
"What data do you to capture and store in HBase?"
and then ask yourself...
"How do I plan on accessing the data?"
From what I can tell, you want to track certain events made by a user.
So you're recording at Time X, user A did something.
Then the question is how do you want to access the data.
Do you primarily say "Show me all the events in the past 15 minutes and organize them by user?"
Or do you say "Show me the most recent events by user A" ?
Here's the issue.
If you are more interested and will frequently ask the question of "Show me the most recent events by user A",
Then you would want to do the following:
Key = User ID (hashed if necessary)
Column Family: Data (For lack of a better name)
Then store each event in a separate column where the column name is something like "event" + (max Long - Time Stamp) .
This will place the most recent event first.
The reason I say "event" + the long, is that you may want to place user specific information in a column and you would want to make sure it was in front of the event data.
Now if your access pattern was more along the lines of show me the events that occurred in the past 15 minutes, then you would use the time stamp and then have to worry about hot spotting and region splits. But then you could get your data from a simple start/stop row scan.
In the first case, you can use get() while still a scan, its a very efficient fetch.
In the second, you will always need to do a scan.
Having said that, there are other things to think about including frequency and how wide your rows will get over time.
(Mainly in terms of the first example I gave.)
The reason I said that your question is boring is that its been asked numerous times and every time its asked, the initial question doesn't provide enough information to actually give a good answer...
HTH
-Mike
On Oct 16, 2012, at 4:53 PM, Neil Yalowitz <ne...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hopefully this is a fun question. :)
>
> Assume you could architect an HBase table from scratch and you were
> choosing between the following two key structures.
>
> 1)
>
> The first structure creates a unique row key for each PUT. The rows are
> events related to a user ID. There may be up to several hundred events for
> each user ID (probably not thousands, an average of perhaps ~100 events per
> user). Each key would be made unique with a reverse-order-timestamp or
> perhaps just random characters (we don't particularly care about using ROT
> for sorting newest here).
>
> key
> ----
> AAAAAA + some-unique-chars
>
> The table will look like this:
>
> key vals cf:mycf ts
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> AAAAAA9999... myval1 1350345600
> AAAAAA8888... myval2 1350259200
> AAAAAA7777... myval3 1350172800
>
>
> Retrieving these values will use a Scan with startRow and stopRow. In
> hbase shell, it would look like:
>
> $ scan 'mytable',{STARTROW=>'AAAAAA', ENDROW=>'AAAAAA_'}
>
>
> 2)
>
> The second structure choice uses only the user ID as the key and relies on
> row versions to store all the events. For example:
>
> key vals cf:mycf ts
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> AAAAAA myval1 1350345600
> AAAAAA myval2 1350259200
> AAAAAA myval3 1350172800
>
> Retrieving these values will use a Get with VERSIONS = somebignumber. In
> hbase shell, it would look like:
>
> $ get 'mytable','AAAAAA',{COLUMN=>'cf:mycf', VERSIONS=>999}
>
> ...although this probably violates a comment in the HBase documentation:
>
> "It is not recommended setting the number of max versions to an exceedingly
> high level (e.g., hundreds or more) unless those old values are very dear
> to you because this will greatly increase StoreFile size."
>
> ...found here: http://hbase.apache.org/book/schema.versions.html
>
>
> So, are there any performance considerations between Scan vs. Get in this
> use case? Which choice would you go for?
>
>
>
> Neil Yalowitz
> neilyalowitz@gmail.com