re: "Almost every blog I read about HBase tells me it's a clone of BigTable."
The HBase website says that too.... http://hbase.apache.org/ re: "Almost every blog I've read about HBase also tells me to use a lot of RAM" So does the Hbase Reference Guide... http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#perf.os For more information, see... http://hbase.apache.org/book.html#other.info On 3/5/12 3:25 AM, "D S" <[email protected]> wrote: >Hi, > >I'm learning more about HBase and I'm curious how much of HBase is >actually based on Google's original dB. In Google's origins stories, >they are well known for using low cost commodity hardware in scale in >order to store their web database. > >Almost every blog I read about HBase tells me it's a clone of >BigTable. Almost every blog I've read about HBase also tells me to >use a lot of RAM - gigabytes worth. Some even tell me not to even >consider HBase with less than 4GB of RAM. > >If I remember my history correctly, a commodity machine in the year >2003 had around 512MB to 1GB of RAM in it. The fancier ones had, 2GB. > From everything I've read, running HBase on such machines is a very >bad idea yet this was the machines readily available in the year 2003 >when Google started it's growth. > >I'm confused at the moment. Can someone give me a bit of background >about how HBase performance is handled from the "low" end which was >considered "high" end back then? Should I assume that HBase is just a >clone of BigTable? What is HBase's history? Are the blogs wrong? > >Thanks for any clarification anyone can give. >
