Common Misconceptions about SQL on Hadoop
Now that many Hadoop-based Big Data platforms offer SQL support, misconceptions about SQL on Hadoop seem to proliferating. In this short article, I’ll explore a few common misconceptions . . . .
-Cynthia M. Saracco, Senior Solutions Architect, IBM
Implementations are largely the same
SQL is SQL, so it’s basically a software commodity, right? Well, not really. If you look beyond the basics – like writing a simple SELECT statement – you’ll find substantial differences across today’s SQL-on-Hadoop implementations. These differences span
- Breadth of language support and ISO SQL compliance
- Integration with the Hadoop ecosystem, including native storage and meta data storage facilities
- Query optimization, indexing, performance tuning, and monitoring capabilities
- Integration with popular enterprise software, including relational DBMSs, business intelligence tools, and others
Sharing data between SQL and other Hadoop applications is unrealistic
Actually, some SQL-on-Hadoop implementations are designed to facilitate sharing data across various applications. In particular, implementations that store data in the Hadoop Distributed File System (HDFS) in non-proprietary formats promote access for both SQL and non-SQL applications. Use of HCatalog for meta data management can also help certain tools and applications consume the same data readily. When you consider the high data volumes and various APIs popular in the Hadoop ecosystem, having one copy of the data easily shared across multiple applications can be quite important.
For my projects, I often use Big SQL to define external tables over data that’s already in HDFS. Doing so allows existing applications to continue to work with the data and makes that same data available to me for complex queries and analysis. If you’re curious about this approach, I’ve provided examples in some materials I’ve posted to SlideShare. See Lab 4.6 of Getting Started with Big SQL 4.0 and Lab 4.1 of Working with HBase and Big SQL. I’ve also begun experimenting with using Spark to access data modeled as Big SQL tables – an approach that lets me leverage capabilities unique to Big SQL and capabilities unique Spark over the same data.
SQL can’t work with “raw” data commonly stored in Hadoop
Support for data types and data formats varies with each SQL-on-Hadoop implementation. Although many organizations use Hadoop to store “traditional” data (including transactional data readily modeled in tabular structures), semi-structured and unstructured data are also popular. Approaches to modeling such data with SQL on Hadoop include using large objects (LOB), converting or shredding a nested data structure into a “flat” table of traditional column types, or using SerDes (serializers/deserializers) to process the data. The latter is a Hive concept that supports SQL access to a greater range of data often found in Hadoop-based systems. Today, a wide variety of SerDes are available publicly and organizations can write their own as needed.
SQL’s the best way to get started with Hadoop
SQL can provide an easy, familiar on-ramp to Hadoop for relational DBMS professionals and certainly provides strong query capabilities over Big Data stored in Hadoop. However, it’s only one of several options available for processing Hadoop data. Certain application requirements – such an analyzing sentiments expressed in social media posts – can be better satisfied through other available APIs or tools. Examine your project’s needs and the skills of your staff closely to determine whether or not SQL on Hadoop is your best starting point.