Re: Access cell tags from HBase shell

>>Then how can I revert them to a recognizable form? I think for that I don't think we have any APIs. May be for now you may have to parse the tag expression and map every oridinal to the visibility label string. Regards Ram On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 9:09 PM,

Re: hbase doubts

For #3, we already have the following in 1.1 release: HBASE-10201 Port 'Make flush decisions per column family' to trunk On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 6:36 PM, Shushant Arora wrote: > 1.Why is it better to have single file per region than multiple files for > read

hbase doubts

1.Why is it better to have single file per region than multiple files for read performance. Why can't multile threads read multiple file and give better performance? 2Does hbase regionserver has single thread for compactions and split for all regions its holding? Why can't single thread per

RE: Access cell tags from HBase shell

Yes, cell.getTagsLength is != 0. Good. I’m running HBase locally in pseudo distributed mode so I only have one hbase-site.xml to edit (?). But I must force the issue in the java client by setting the configuration programmatically so: config.set("hbase.client.rpc.codec",

RE: Hbase ACL

Hi Ram, I very much appreciate the guidance. I should be able to run through the gambit of tests via code this afternoon and will report back when I do. One thing I don't understand - if I don't do the initial RW grant then userX will never be allowed to write to the table, so I don't see how

Re: Hbase ACL

I verified the above behaviour using test case as the cluster was busy with other activities. So in the above example that you mentioned, you had already issued RW access to user-X on the table. Then a specific cell is over written with R permission using the special 'grant' command. Now as per

Re: Access cell tags from HBase shell

Have you set the property in the hbase-site.xml on the client side also? Can you try to retrieve per cell from the REsult and check if the cell.getTagsLength is != 0? Regards Ram On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 1:41 AM, wrote: > Thanks guys. I've given it a go