Yes, a BatchWriter is for one table only. If you're writing to multiple
tables, the MultiTableBatchWriter might be helpful. The
MultiTableBatchWriter does the same thing that managing multiple
BatchWriters would do but shares the memory usage.
Are you familiar with Hadoop's MapReduce framework?
http://hadoop.apache.org/docs/current/hadoop-mapreduce-client/hadoop-mapreduce-client-core/MapReduceTutorial.html
MapReduce jobs accept data from InputFormats and write data to
OutputFormats. Specifically, the FileInputFormat allows your MapReduce
jobs to read data from HDFS and the AccumuloOutputFormat will write
Mutations to an Accumulo table. Unless you have many nodes with lots and
lots of data constantly flowing in, MapReduce might be overkill. I just
thought I'd mention it though.
http://accumulo.apache.org/1.6/apidocs/org/apache/accumulo/core/client/mapreduce/AccumuloOutputFormat.html
Keep in touch -- wouldn't want to keep you from being able to graduate :)
Revan1988 wrote:
Every one batchWriter is for only one table (isn't it?).
I need to separate my json record in 3 tables (my record came from an IDS so
i have to divide ALERT, DNS and HTTP record type).
So maybe i can use 3 batchWriter... I'll try!!
And what about FileInputFormat and the AccumuloOutputFormat? I'm sorry but i
don't know it very well... do you have any website, pdf or sample that i can
study about this?
Thank you again!
I want to do a good work because it is the project for my graduation of
MSc... but here in my university no one know so much about accumulo.
-----
Andrea Leoni
Italy
Computer Engineering
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-accumulo.1065345.n5.nabble.com/Ingest-speed-tp14005p14024.html
Sent from the Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
