Skip to main content

Indexing use cases and technical strategies

In this post, let us look at 3 real life indexing use cases. While Hadoop is commonly used for distributed batch index building, it is desirable to optimize the index capability in near real time. We look at some practical real life implementations where the engineers have successfully worked out their technology stack combinations using different products.

(1) Near Real Time index at eBay:

The first use case looks at eBay where HBase is used with a novel approach for building a Near Real Time search index:
- Building a full index takes hours due to data-set size
- # of items changed every minute are much less
- Identify updates in time window t1 – t2 (Timerange scan)
- Build a ‘mini index’ only on last X minutes of changes using Map-Reduce
- Mini indices are copied and consumed in near real time by query servers
- (HBase) Column Family to track last modified time
- Utilize ‘time range scan’ feature of HBase

(2) Distributed indexing strategy at Trovit:

Trovit is a search engine for classified ads of real estate, jobs, cars and vacation rentals. It seems to have arrived at a right mix of Storm, HDFS, HBase and Zookeeper for its architecture. However, particularly, with regards to distributed index strategy, it invokes:
- 2 phases indexing (2 sequential MapReduce jobs) comprising of :
-- Partial indexing: Generate lots of “micro indexes” per each monolithic or sharded index  (MapRduce + Embedded Solr + HDFS)
-- Merge: Groups all the “micro indexes” and merge them to get the production data  (Lucene

(3) Incremental Processing by Google’s Percolator:

The topic would have been incomplete without referring to Google’s Percolator paper which describes a technique for incremental update of index with BigTable.
A Percolator system consists of three binaries that run on every machine in the cluster: a Percolator worker, a Bigtable [9] tablet server, and a GFS [20]  chunkserver. All observers are linked into the Percolator worker, which scans the Bigtable for changed columns (“notifications”) and invokes the corresponding observers as a function call in the worker process. The observers perform transactions by sending read/write RPCs to Bigtable tablet servers, which in turn send read/write RPCs to GFS chunkservers.
Taking cue from this implementation, many variations have been worked out by engineers while leveraging Hadoop HDFS in combination with HBase, Storm and/or Hive.

top image source:


Popular posts from this blog

In-memory data model with Apache Gora

Open source in-memory data model and persistence for big data framework Apache Gora™ version 0.3, was released in May 2013. The 0.3 release offers significant improvements and changes to a number of modules including a number of bug fixes. However, what may be of significant interest to the DynamoDB community will be the addition of a gora-dynamodb datastore for mapping and persisting objects to Amazon's DynamoDB. Additionally the release includes various improvements to the gora-core and gora-cassandra modules as well as a new Web Services API implementation which enables users to extend Gora to any cloud storage platform of their choice. This 2-part post provides commentary on all of the above and a whole lot more, expanding to cover where Gora fits in within the NoSQL and Big Data space, the development challenges and features which have been baked into Gora 0.3 and finally what we have on the road map for the 0.4 development drive.
Introducing Apache Gora Although there are var…

Data deduplication tactics with HDFS and MapReduce

As the amount of data continues to grow exponentially, there has been increased focus on stored data reduction methods. Data compression, single instance store and data deduplication are among the common techniques employed for stored data reduction.
Deduplication often refers to elimination of redundant subfiles (also known as chunks, blocks, or extents). Unlike compression, data is not changed and eliminates storage capacity for identical data. Data deduplication offers significant advantage in terms of reduction in storage, network bandwidth and promises increased scalability.
From a simplistic use case perspective, we can see application in removing duplicates in Call Detail Record (CDR) for a Telecom carrier. Similarly, we may apply the technique to optimize on network traffic carrying the same data packets.
Some of the common methods for data deduplication in storage architecture include hashing, binary comparison and delta differencing. In this post, we focus on how MapReduce and…

Pricing models for Hadoop products

A look at the various pricing models adopted by the vendors in the Hadoop ecosystem. While the pricing models are evolving in this rapid and dynamic market, listed below are some of the major variations utilized by companies in the sphere.
1) Per Node:Among the most common model, the node based pricing mechanism utilizes customized rules for determining pricing per node. This may be as straight forward as pricing per name node and data node or could have complex variants of pricing based on number of core processors utilized by the nodes in the cluster or per user license in case of applications.
2) Per TB:The data based pricing mechanism charges customer for license cost per TB of data. This model usually accounts non replicated data for computation of cost.
3) Subscription Support cost only:In this model, the vendor prefers to give away software for free but charges the customer for subscription support on a specified number of nodes. The support timings and level of support further …