It would be interesting to hear your experience w asynchronous hbase client (it 
is used extensively at su where a few of us hbase committers work)

Stack



On Jan 14, 2011, at 2:21, tsuna <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 11:12 AM, Weishung Chung <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Multiple batches of 10k *new/updated* rows at any time to different tables
>> by different clients simultaneously. I want these multiple batches of
>> insertions to be done super fast. At the same time, I would like to be able
>> to scale up to 100k rows at a time (the goal).  Now, I am building a cluster
>> of size 6 to 7 nodes.
> 
> If you're writing a multi-threaded client and you're going to have
> many clients like this writing to HBase continuously, I recommend
> writing your application with asynchbase
> (http://github.com/stumbleupon/asynchbase) instead.  It's an alternate
> HBase client library I wrote and in my application it significantly
> increased write throughput.  It can easily push 150k updates per
> second to a 20-node cluster – and then it's the local machine that's
> CPU bound, not the HBase cluster (the local machine is a very slow VM
> so it doesn't have a lot of horsepower).  This client is especially
> good for throughput oriented workloads and was written to be
> thread-safe from the ground up (unlike HTable).
> 
> -- 
> Benoit "tsuna" Sigoure
> Software Engineer @ www.StumbleUpon.com

Reply via email to