Thanks Dean, that sounds similar to the approach we're considering. Andy, I can see value in having ACLs on a per-column-pattern (or maybe just per-prefix to make multiple pattern conflict resolution simpler) basis. I know this isn't in scope for the initial release, but would the current design lend itself to be extended for this case? The use case is where a column prefix naming scheme is used for example, and certain groups should have write access to certain prefix patterns.
thanks, Bill On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 2:48 PM, Hiller, Dean x66079 < [email protected]> wrote: > I don't know if it is good or bad but we went down a route of all keys are > prefixed or postfixed with "customerId"....prefixed if you want their data > more isolated or postfixed if you want them sharing the same grid more and > more. > > We had some shared tables that are not postfixed nor prefixed and are only > touched by a committee when needed for everyone...obviously tradeoff in > doing that. > > Later, > Dean > > -----Original Message----- > From: Otis Gospodnetic [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 9:55 PM > To: [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: Re: any multitenancy suggestions for HBase? > > Hi Bill, > > At the recent HBase hackathon in Berlin there was some word of ACLs in (the > next release of?) HBase from the Trend Micro guys, I believe. > Check this: http://search-hadoop.com/?q=acl&fc_project=HBase&fc_type=jira > > > Otis > > -- > We're hiring HBase / Hadoop / Hive / Mahout engineers with interest in Big > Data Mining and Analytics > > http://blog.sematext.com/2011/04/18/hiring-data-mining-analytics-machine-learning-hackers/ > > > > >________________________________ > >From: Bill Graham <[email protected]> > >To: [email protected] > >Sent: Monday, June 13, 2011 6:31 PM > >Subject: any multitenancy suggestions for HBase? > > > >Hello there, > > > >We have a number of different groups within our organization who will soon > >be working within the same HBase cluster and we're trying to set up some > >best practices to keep thinks organized. Since there are no HBase ACLs > and > >no concept of multiple databases in the cluster, we're looking to propose > a > >simple convention that will hopefully keep people from stepping on each > >others toes (or worse!). > > > >Does anyone have any best/worst practices they're willing to share w.r.t. > >thing likes table/column naming schemes in a multitenant environment? For > >table names for example, is there anything better than a basic > dot-delimited > >naming convention with the group name as the first token? > > > >Also, I assume there's no performance cost with using long table names > like > >there is with long CF:col names. Please let me know if that's not the > case. > > > >thanks, > >Bill > > > > > > > This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the > addressee and > may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader > of the > message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of > the > intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this > communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this > communication in > error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and > any > attachments from your system. > >
