[jira] [Commented] (PHOENIX-2786) Can MultiTableOutputFormat be used instead of MultiHfileOutputFormat
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-2786?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15204754#comment-15204754 ] maghamravikiran commented on PHOENIX-2786: -- [~churromorales] From what I see, MultiTableOutputFormat uses the Put / Delete mutation rather than writing to HFiles that MultiHfileOutputFormat does. We definitely have seen times , for ex: for a newly created table , doing direct writes to HBase perform way better than bulk load but in general writing to HFiles performs better. I definitely agree to your valid point that the code in MultiHfileOutputFormat has a lot from HfileOutputFormat except for few minor changes. > Can MultiTableOutputFormat be used instead of MultiHfileOutputFormat > > > Key: PHOENIX-2786 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-2786 > Project: Phoenix > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: churro morales > > MultiHfileOutputFormat depends on a lot of HBase classes that it shouldn't > depend on. It seems like MultiHfileOutputFormat and MultiTableOutputFormat > have the same goal. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)
[jira] [Commented] (PHOENIX-2786) Can MultiTableOutputFormat be used instead of MultiHfileOutputFormat
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-2786?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15204747#comment-15204747 ] Sergey Soldatov commented on PHOENIX-2786: -- As for Bulk load stuff I would say that MultiTableOutputFormat is hardly can be used. It's designed to put data into hbase tables using mutations and using it for bulk load is meaningless. > Can MultiTableOutputFormat be used instead of MultiHfileOutputFormat > > > Key: PHOENIX-2786 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-2786 > Project: Phoenix > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: churro morales > > MultiHfileOutputFormat depends on a lot of HBase classes that it shouldn't > depend on. It seems like MultiHfileOutputFormat and MultiTableOutputFormat > have the same goal. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)
[jira] [Commented] (PHOENIX-2786) Can MultiTableOutputFormat be used instead of MultiHfileOutputFormat
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-2786?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15204501#comment-15204501 ] churro morales commented on PHOENIX-2786: - [~jamestaylor] Yes MultiTableOutputFormat is available in 0.98 and earlier versions as well. > Can MultiTableOutputFormat be used instead of MultiHfileOutputFormat > > > Key: PHOENIX-2786 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-2786 > Project: Phoenix > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: churro morales > > MultiHfileOutputFormat depends on a lot of HBase classes that it shouldn't > depend on. It seems like MultiHfileOutputFormat and MultiTableOutputFormat > have the same goal. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)
[jira] [Commented] (PHOENIX-2786) Can MultiTableOutputFormat be used instead of MultiHfileOutputFormat
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-2786?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=15204494#comment-15204494 ] James Taylor commented on PHOENIX-2786: --- [~maghamravikiran] & [~gabriel.reid] - we're trying to get rid of dependencies on any internal HBase APIs so that we don't have to maintain multiple Phoenix branches for each HBase branch. Any idea if It's feasible to use MultiTableOutputFormat versus MultiHfileOutputFormat? [~churromorales] - is MultiTableOutputFormat available in 0.98 too? > Can MultiTableOutputFormat be used instead of MultiHfileOutputFormat > > > Key: PHOENIX-2786 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-2786 > Project: Phoenix > Issue Type: Task >Reporter: churro morales > > MultiHfileOutputFormat depends on a lot of HBase classes that it shouldn't > depend on. It seems like MultiHfileOutputFormat and MultiTableOutputFormat > have the same goal. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)
