Agree with you. One person can deploy Wordpress blog system as his site and one big enterprise can deploy Wordpress blog system as the enterprise blog platform.
But with HBase, you could not develop a Wordpress-like product because it's suited for 5 more nodes and not for 1 node. Ross Rick-2 wrote: > > Allow me to disagree and take a few arrows here. Not picking at what is > currently being proposed, but rather with a perception of the future. > > In my mind, Applications are going to continue to blur the lines from > phone to cloud. Users are not normally inclined to accept answers like, > "Well this is a different platform, you have to do something completely > different". They expect differences between platforms, but the successes > of the future will likely smooth those differences rather than accentuate > them. > > Developers will surely want to use the same storage paradigm for all > scales and let the different system manage their scales. For example, my > application uses HSQLDB for the desktop and Oracle/Whatever for > Enterprise, but damn near the same model is used. > > I would want to use a properly scaled HBase for the desktop, and then, as > is appropriate for my app, push that data to cluster. This process is > nearly seamless when the underlying language is the same. Success in the > future isn't likely just about how big you can get. Dare I say it, it's > probably more like 'rightsizing' your data. > > Rick > > > On Jan 15, 2010, at 4:45 PM, Andrew Purtell wrote: > >> As long as we are all clear about the usefulness of a single host system. >> For map-reduce over BigTable, nothing more than development, functional >> testing, and toy demo scenarios. >> >> - Andy >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ---- >>> From: Otis Gospodnetic <otis_gospodne...@yahoo.com> >>> To: hbase-user@hadoop.apache.org >>> Sent: Fri, January 15, 2010 2:30:34 PM >>> Subject: Re: HBase on 1 box? how big? >>> >>> Heh, I like the analogies! :) >>> Yes, it makes no sense to use HBase for production data volumes, etc., >>> but this >>> might be handy for development. >>> Or for a demo that needs to consists of the same pieces (daemons, >>> configs, etc.) >>> on 1 box, so that one can easily move it to a proper, big cluster, >>> without >>> re-engineering or replacing any of the components. >>> >>> For example, you may have an app that you want to demo to a customer, >>> and you >>> can't ask them for N boxes for the demo. But you can ask them for 1 box >>> to >>> install something on. >>> >>> Or maybe you can run everything from a memory stick? ;) Hey, is there a >>> technical reason why having all jars, scripts, configs, etc. on a stick, >>> and >>> have the configs point to dirs on the stick for holding data? I'm not >>> joking, >>> really! :) >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Otis >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ---- >>>> From: Andrew Purtell >>>> To: hbase-user@hadoop.apache.org >>>> Sent: Fri, January 15, 2010 4:17:35 PM >>>> Subject: Re: HBase on 1 box? how big? >>>> >>>> On that scale, why not use MySQL or Postgres? >>>> >>>> "HBase in a box" is like "dynamic equilibrium", or "virtual reality", >>>> or >>>> "jumbo shrimp"... :-) >>>> >>>> - Andy >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ---- >>>>> From: Otis Gospodnetic >>>>> To: hbase-user@hadoop.apache.org >>>>> Sent: Fri, January 15, 2010 12:54:42 PM >>>>> Subject: HBase on 1 box? how big? >>>>> >>>>> Hello, >>>>> >>>>> I understand running HBase on a single box is kind of >>>>> pointless (thanks Andrew Purtell for the reply about numbers of >>>>> boxes)... but I was wondering what kind of box might one need to >>>>> host/run various HBase/Hadoop processes? >>>>> >>>>> Imagine I just need to have "HBase in a box", so to speak. :) >>>>> >>>>> I understand it depends on the volume on data, DB structure, request >>> rates... >>>>> I don't have those numbers, but say I want HBase to have 100M rows >>>>> with >>>>> data from Apache logs and want to run the common web analytics/stats >>>>> reports on a nightly basis. >>>>> >>>>> * Would an EC2 Large Instance suffice? >>>>> -- Large Instance 7.5 GB of memory, 4 EC2 Compute Units (2 virtual >>>>> cores >>>>> with 2 EC2 Compute Units each), 850 GB of local instance storage, >>>>> 64-bit >>>>> platform >>>>> >>>>> * How about EC2 Small Instance? >>>>> -- Small Instance (Default) 1.7 GB of memory, 1 EC2 Compute Unit (1 >>>>> virtual >>>> core >>>>> with 1 EC2 Compute Unit), 160 GB of local instance storage, 32-bit >>>>> platform >>>>> >>>>> Thanks, >>>>> Otis >>>>> P.S. >>>>> hw specs from http://aws.amazon.com/ec2/#instance >> >> >> >> >> > > > -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/HBase-on-1-box--how-big--tp27183442p27481523.html Sent from the HBase User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
