So is it fair to say that the number of tables one can create is also bounded by the number of regions that the cluster can support ?
For example, given 5 region servers and keeping 20 regions / region server - with 5 tables, I am restricted to only being able to scale a single table to 20 regions across the cluster - this might be fine. However, for 20 tables, I can only scale upto 5 regions / table across the cluster - which might not be a good idea. Comments ? On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 5:31 AM, Doug Meil <[email protected]> wrote: > To expand on what Lars said, there is an example of how this is layed out > on disk... > > http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#trouble.namenode.disk > > ... regions distribute the table, so two different tables will be > distributed by separate sets of regions. > > > > > On 12/1/11 3:14 AM, "Lars George" <[email protected]> wrote: > >>Hi Sam, >> >>You need to handle them all separately. The note - I assume - was solely >>explaining the fact that the "load" of a region server is defined by the >>number of regions it hosts, not the number of tables. If you want to >>precreate the regions for one or more than one table is the same work: >>create the tables (one by one) with the list of split points. >> >>Lars >> >>On Dec 1, 2011, at 7:50 AM, Sam Seigal wrote: >> >>> HI, >>> >>> I had a question about the relationship between regions and tables. >>> >>> Is there a way to pre-create regions for multiple tables ? or each >>> table has its own set of regions managed independently ? >>> >>> I read on one of the threads that there is really no limit on the >>> number of tables, but that we need to be careful about is the number >>> of regions. Does this mean that the regions can be pre created for >>> multiple tables ? >>> >>> Thank you, >>> >>> Sam >> >> > >
