The are a few reasons why I wanted to go with Socket instead of REST, to name a couple:
- By applying Edward's patch I was able to gain access to the 'entire' HBase interface, from creating to deleting tables, etc, which I couldn't do with REST. Is this flexibility something sought for future development? - Performance gain. Working with xml can sometimes be problematic and 'heavy'. > I would suggest exploring building a Thrift servlet that mimics the structure > of the REST servlet That could work if I knew Java :P Anyhow, despite HBase being pretty new, it sure kicks ass. Kudos to you guys. -- Thiago On Dec 7, 2007 10:42 AM, Bryan Duxbury <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What's the motivation for using straight a straight TCP socket rather > than REST? The motivation behind producing a REST interface in the > first place is that since the client still lives in Java, then we get > to take advantage of all the built-in Java client work that's been > done. If you're looking for a more lightweight way to interact with > HBase (since REST can be a little heavy at times), then rather than > go the HQL route, I would suggest exploring building a Thrift servlet > that mimics the structure of the REST servlet. This is something > that's been discussed as a next step for HBase interoperability. > > -Bryan > > > On Dec 6, 2007, at 8:25 PM, Thiago Jackiw wrote: > > > Is there a way to interact with HBase via TCP/socket connection > > directly instead of just using the REST api? > > > > Thanks > >
