I don't have a particular document or source stating this but I think it is actually kind of self-explanatory if your think about the algorithm.
Anyway, you can read this http://blog.sematext.com/2012/04/09/hbasewd-avoid-regionserver-hotspotting-despite-writing-records-with-sequential-keys/ And some older discussions by experts on this topic: http://search-hadoop.com/?q=prefix+salt+key+hotspot&fc_project=HBase Regards, Shahab On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Joarder KAMAL <joard...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks Shahab for the reply. I was also thinking in the same way. > Could you able to guide me through any reference which can confirm this > understanding? > > > Regards, > Joarder Kamal > > > > On 27 June 2013 23:24, Shahab Yunus <shahab.yu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I think you will need to update your hash function and redistribute data. > > As far as I know this has been on of the drawbacks of this approach (and > > the SemaText library) > > > > Regards, > > Shahab > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 7:24 PM, Joarder KAMAL <joard...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > May be a simple question to answer for the experienced HBase users and > > > developers: > > > > > > If I use hash partitioning to evenly distribute write workloads into my > > > region servers and later add a new region server to scale or split an > > > existing region, then do I need to change my hash function and > re-shuffle > > > all the existing data in between all the region servers (old and new)? > > Or, > > > is there any better solution for this? Any guidance would be very much > > > helpful. > > > > > > Thanks in advance. > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > Joarder Kamal > > > > > >
