Right, BD.
We use incrementing IDs for most things because it gives us ordering.
If you only have random-key access, you would be better suited using
UUID-style IDs as Bryan says.
Bryan Duxbury wrote:
Not necessarily in context of hbase, but Rapleaf uses UUIDs/GUIDs, since
they are crazy fast to generate and have no dependencies on external
resources.
In the context of hbase, a benefit of UUIDs is that they will be
randomly distributed over your whole table, instead of consistently
showing up in the last region in the table.
-Bryan
On Jul 8, 2009, at 11:10 AM, Jonathan Gray wrote:
There are a number of different ways you could generate IDs.
Some people use GUIDs, probably the simplest way, though not my
recommendation.
ZooKeeper as a facility for ID generation.
Here, we use HBase for ID generation. Currently in production, which
is running on 0.19, I run a custom patch that works very much like
incrementColumnValue does in 0.20. When moving to 0.20 I plan on
migrating our ID assignment system to the built-in ICV.
You can expect about a 1ms end-to-end time on an increment operation,
so if you need to generate more than 1000 ids/second, you need to
think about how to distribute it across multiple rows or you could
grab them in batches (increment by 100 to generate 100 ids at a time,
still takes 1ms).
Hope that helps.
JG
Vaibhav Puranik wrote:
Hi,
Does anybody have any suggestion/best practices on id/row/key
generation for
HBase rows?
Do people use sequential ids (like rdbms - 1,2,3,4...) or people use
strings ids?
What id server do you use? Do we have to write our own?
Any help/experiences please?.
Regards,
Vaibhav
