DOYUNG YOON created S2GRAPH-50:
----------------------------------
Summary: Provide new HBase Storage Schema
Key: S2GRAPH-50
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/S2GRAPH-50
Project: S2Graph
Issue Type: New Feature
Reporter: DOYUNG YOON
Assignee: DOYUNG YOON
I think we need to provide choice for both for `Tall` and `Wide` row for
IndexEdge. The fatal difference between these two would be following.
# Wide.
if we store adjacent edges on single row with wide column and use get request
to get adjacent edges. This is how IndexEdge is currently stored.
# Tall.
adjacent edges are on multiple `consecutive` rows and we use scanner to scan
through them.
once S2GRAPH-17 is resolved, then I think only thing we have to do is provide
`IndexEdgeSerializer` and `IndexEdgeDeserializer` for Tall row schema on HBase
and I think this is very trivial task since we all have primitives for this.
The hard part would be changing interface for client.
currently query support `offset` and `limit` for pagination. if we use scanner,
then there is no easy way to support `offset`.
I think it is worth to try with Tall row schema and benchmark them over Wide
row schema. also I think this is very beneficial for others who is interested
in implementing other storage such as RocksDB or LevelDB(including myself).
I will followup with benchmark on both `Tall` and `Wide` row then we can decide
what schema should be default. What others think?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
