question Re: Performance metrics phoenix bulk load vs hbase bulk load? in Archives of Support Questions (Read Only)

Performance metrics phoenix bulk load vs hbase bulk load?

sunile_manjee — Sat, 24 Sep 2016 04:36:42 GMT

Are there any known performance stats between phoenix bulk load (mapreduce) vs hbase bulk load?

Re: Performance metrics phoenix bulk load vs hbase bulk load?

rgelhausen — Sat, 24 Sep 2016 04:50:25 GMT

I don't have stats, but you need to use Phoenix Bulk Load regardless, as HBase Bulk Load will not ensure consistent secondary indices, nor will it use the correct signing and byte ordering conventions that Phoenix needs.

Re: Performance metrics phoenix bulk load vs hbase bulk load?

nmaillard1 — Mon, 26 Sep 2016 14:39:07 GMT

@Sunile Manjee

I have never seen vs stats on these two bulk loading calls. If you have a phoenix table it would require a little bit of work to get a native Hbase schema to really look enough like a phoenix table for this comparaison to mean anything. Things like complex keys or column types come to mind. If it is just a phoenix view on an hbase table then comparaison might make more sense but you loose a lot of phoenix magic.

Overall the performance should not variate much from one to the other aside from any extra work you hide in the Phoenix table, like index,stats...

From a pure operations perspective use the bulkload best fitted to the type of your table

Re: Performance metrics phoenix bulk load vs hbase bulk load?

sunile_manjee — Tue, 27 Sep 2016 11:59:47 GMT

@nmaillard & @Randy Gelhausen great stuff. thank you