Re: [geowave-dev] Accumulo Tables

[Marcel <m.jacob@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

If I understand you correctly the "_SPATIAL_TEMPORAL_VECTOR_IDX" contains all data + my index. So there is no possibility to differentiate between disk usage for the data itself and the disk usage for indexing?

Best regards,
Marcel Jacob.

Am 29.09.2015 21:41, schrieb Whitney O'Meara:

Hey Marcel,

The "_SPATIAL_TEMPORAL_VECTOR_IDX" is the table that contains all of your data that you've ingested.  As GeoWave generates a unique key per feature attribute, you can expect the number of entries in the table to be the number of features you've ingested multiplied by the number of attributes per feature. 

The "_SPATIAL_TEMPORAL_VECTOR_IDX_GEOWAVE_ALT_INDEX" is an optional secondary index which is used to look up features by their feature ID.  In practice this speeds up certain operations that GeoWave performs, but is not required and can be turned off by setting your AccumuloOptions appropriately. 

The "_GEOWAVE_METADATA" table is where all of the information about your data adapters, indices, and statistics gets stored. 

That should be all of the tables generated by GeoWave.  Let us know if you have any other questions.

Whitney

On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 3:16 PM, Marcel <m.jacob@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hello all,
I would be very happen if you could explain something about the geowave tables which will be created while import.
As some additional information I use vector data and a spatial temporal index.
When I load a 3.3 GiB file into GeoWave:
1) There is a table "geowave_SPATIAL_TEMPORAL_VECTOR_IDX" with a very large number of entries (~ number of columns * number of records). So I assume this table holds the data itself.
2) "geowave_SPATIAL_TEMPORAL_VECTOR_IDX_GEOWAVE_ALT_INDEX" is the second table with exactly the number of records of my dataset.
When looking at the disk usage with the accumulo shell table 1) is approximately 1.2 GB. Is this compression possible through serialization?
Table 2) is very small: only 9 MB.  But where is the index table? I can not imagine that the index only needs 9MB.
3) geowave_GEOWAVE_METADATA
Do I miss any tables?

Thanks in advance,
Marcel Jacob.

_______________________________________________
geowave-dev mailing list
geowave-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.locationtech.org/mailman/listinfo/geowave-dev

_______________________________________________
geowave-dev mailing list
geowave-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://www.locationtech.org/mailman/listinfo/geowave-dev