Dave, I would recommend trying it in your environment. Like most tests you can find other blogs that argue the performance is better:
http://blog.erdemagaoglu.com/post/4605524309/lzo-vs-snappy-vs-lzf-vs-zlib-a-comparison-of It will depend on your environment, filesize, how well it compresses, how taxed your disks are, how wide your cells are, etc.. On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:09 AM, David Koch <[email protected]> wrote: > *BUMP* > > Sorry, > > /David > > On Sat, Nov 3, 2012 at 3:57 PM, David Koch <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > Are scans faster when compression is activated? The HBase book by Lars > > George seems to suggest so (p424, Section on "Compression" in chapter > > "Performance Tuning"). > > > > "... compression usually will yield overall better performance, because > > the overhead of the CPU performing the compression and de- compression is > > less than what is required to read more data from disk." > > > > I searched around for a bit and found this: > > http://gbif.blogspot.fr/2012/02/performance-evaluation-of-hbase.html. > The > > author conducted a series of scan performance tests on tables of up to > > 200million rows and found that compression actually slowed down read > > performance slightly - albeit at lower CPU load. > > > > Thank you, > > > > /David > > > -- Kevin O'Dell Customer Operations Engineer, Cloudera
