This is a hypothetical question. Why do you care? Can you run current Windows on '03 machines? Or Linux (with KDE/Gnome)?
HBase is designed for modern machines. ________________________________ From: D S <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, March 5, 2012 11:39 AM Subject: Re: HBase & BigTable + History: Can it run decently on a 512MB machine? What's the difference between the two? On 3/5/12, Michael Drzal <[email protected]> wrote: > You really need to consider the entire historical context here. A lot of > the memory used in hbase is buffering writes to disk and for the block > cache. These days, it isn't unreasonable to get 12 2-3TB disks in a > commodity server. Back in 2003, you would not get as many disks, and they > would be much smaller. One way to think about it is the ratio of RAM/disk > space or more operationally what your cache hit ratio is and how busy your > disk drives are. > > Drz > > On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 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. >> > Is HBase's configuration options robust enough that it could go back and run well on those 2003 specs by a bit of tweaking if that what was desired?
