On 09/10/11 07:01, M. C. Srivas wrote:
If you insist on HDFS, try using XFS underneath, it does a much better job than ext3 or ext4 for Hadoop in terms of how data is layed out on disk. But its memory footprint is alteast twice of that of ext3, so it will gobble up a lot more memory on your box.
How stable have you found XFS? I know people have worked a lot on ext4 and I am using it locally, even if something (VirtualBox) tell me off for doing so. I know the Lustre people are using underneath their DFS, and with wide use it does tend to get debugged by others before you use your data.
