Krishmin, 

In the wikisearch example there is a non-sharded index table and a sharded 
document table. The index table is used to reduce the number of tablets that 
need to be searched for a given set of terms. Is your setup similar? I'm a 
little confused since you mention using a sharded index table and that all 
queries will have an infinite range. 

Dave Marion 

----- Original Message -----
From: "Krishmin Rai" <[email protected]> 
To: [email protected] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2012 3:28:15 PM 
Subject: Re: Number of partitions for sharded table 

I should clarify that I've been pre-splitting tables at each shard so that each 
tablet consists of a single row. 

On Oct 30, 2012, at 3:06 PM, Krishmin Rai wrote: 

> Hi All, 
> We're working with an index table whose row is a shardId (an integer, like 
> the wiki-search or IndexedDoc examples). I was just wondering what the right 
> strategy is for choosing a number of partitions, particularly given a cluster 
> that could potentially grow. 
> 
> If I simply set the number of shards equal to the number of slave nodes, 
> additional nodes would not improve query performance (at least over the data 
> already ingested). But starting with more partitions than slave nodes would 
> result in multiple tablets per tablet server… I'm not really sure how that 
> would impact performance, particularly given that all queries against the 
> table will be batchscanners with an infinite range. 
> 
> Just wondering how others have addressed this problem, and if there are any 
> performance rules of thumb regarding the ratio of tablets to tablet servers. 
> 
> Thanks! 
> Krishmin 

Reply via email to