On Fri, Dec 21, 2007 at 12:43:38PM -0800, Ted Dunning wrote: > >* if you need some kind of work-flow, hadoop won't help (but it won't hurt >either) >
Lets start a discussion around this, seems to be something lots of folks could use... There is _some_ notion of job-control though: http://lucene.apache.org/hadoop/docs/r0.15.1/mapred_tutorial.html#Job+Control Arun >As hbase comes of age, then the first two problems will moderate. Adding a >simple queuing system like SQS on the side is an easy way to deal with the >third issue. > >In much of my work, I have lots of big files composed of concatenations of >little files, I can work in hourly batches and my workflow requirements are >minimal so I am very happy with Hadoop. For video file serving, we opted >not to go with Hadoop because we have too many files, didn't need map-reduce >and our systems guys liked perl better than java (go figure). > > >On 12/21/07 12:24 PM, "John Heidemann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> He's not saying "is Hadoop optimal" for things that aren't really >> map/reduce, but "is it reasonable" for those things? >> (Kirk, is that right?) >
