Likelihood to Recommend
Hbase is well suited for large organizations with millions of operations performing on tables, real-time lookup of records in a table, range queries, random reads and writes and online analytics operations. Hbase cannot be replaced for traditional databases as it cannot support all the features, CPU and memory intensive. Observed increased latency when using with MapReduce job joins.
Read full review
It is able to handle simultaneous connections when using the embedded software version. It is well suited for organizations looking for standalone servers that can handle high data volumes and still perform well and which is also cost-effective database management system especially when they are working on a low budget.
Read full review Pros Scalability. HBase can scale to trillions of records. Fast. HBase is extremely fast to scan values or retrieve individual records by key. HBase can be accessed by standard SQL via Apache Phoenix. Integrated. I can easily store and retrieve data from HBase using Apache Spark. It is easy to set up DR and backups. Ingest. It is easy to ingest data into HBase via shell, Java, Apache NiFi, Storm, Spark, Flink, Python and other means. Read full review Performance is really fast. It is portable and easy to take back ups. Its open n source and free. Read full review Cons There are very few commands in HBase. Stored procedures functionality is not available so it should be implemented. HBase is CPU and Memory intensive with large sequential input or output access while as Map Reduce jobs are primarily input or output bound with fixed memory. HBase integrated with Map-reduce jobs will result in random latencies. Read full review Documentation. No GUI tool to view data. Slow via remote access. Read full review Likelihood to Renew
There's really not anything else out there that I've seen comparable for my use cases. HBase has never proven me wrong. Some companies align their whole business on HBase and are moving all of their infrastructure from other database engines to HBase. It's also open source and has a very collaborative community.
Read full review
Because it is free and usually zero maintenance. Just the issue of more difficult format updates in the future lower the rating a bit.
Read full review Usability
Usability has improved by unifying the architecture. The only thing's missing out of the box is a simple GUI DB tool for viewing DB contents and maybe running some SQL queries.
Read full review Support Rating
This is an open source project. It provides a fair amount of free documentation and I think forums somewhere...
Read full review Implementation Rating
Even somebody just starting to use RDBMS himself should get it working quickly, at least if he's got a GUI tool and some SQL knowledge.
Read full review Alternatives Considered Cassandra
os great for writes. But with large datasets, depending, not as great as HBASE.
does support parquet now. HBase still performance issues.
has use cases of being used as time series. HBase, it fails miserably. GeoSpatial data, Hbase does work to an extent. HA between the two are almost the same.
Read full review
Because it is having Open Source License and easy to deploy on windows and linux environment
Read full review Return on Investment As Hbase is a noSql database, here we don't have transaction support and we cannot do many operations on the data. Not having the feature of primary or a composite primary key is an issue as the architecture to be defined cannot be the same legacy type. Also the transaction concept is not applicable here. The way data is printed on console is not so user-friendly. So we had to use some abstraction over HBase (eg apache phoenix) which means there is one new component to handle. Read full review Cost effective saving us from paid relational database. Community support. Efficiency in handling simultaneous connections. Read full review ScreenShots