hbase-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ryan Rawson <ryano...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: HBASE-4089 & HBASE-4147 - on the topic of ops output
Date Tue, 02 Aug 2011 02:43:36 GMT
Cassandra is not a big table clone.

Bigtable specifies 2 things:
- a data model with column families, etc
- a distribution model, a distributed architecture, etc

Only HBase provides both these things.  Cassandra provides elements of
(a) and uses the dynamo model to do distribution.

I believe in HBase because I think it's distribution model is simpler,
more robust and reliable than the dynamo model.

On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 7:40 PM, Fuad Efendi <fuad@efendi.ca> wrote:
>>Doug, sorry for off-topic, it was extremely hot day; and I finally found
>>that it is cheaper to get single dedicated cc1.4xlarge (EC2) for
>>$1.60/hour than to rely on advocated (Whirr and Friends) c1.xlarge
>>($1.68/hour); unbelievable (hot!) 10 minutes for garbage collection of 1
>>Gb heap only, 1000 (small!!!) transactions PER MINUTE only. It can be
>>explained by "virtual" sharing of the same cc1.4xlarge with at least two
>>of other users (3 x $1.68 = $2.04) . Especially "swap", "cache" is used
>>instead of file, and (of course) it is slower.
> No any problem with Hadoop thoughÅ 
> BTW, I need to compare with Cassandra, another Big Table clone.
> (P.S. I used dedicated servers before, and never had problems with Hbase;
> except EC2)
> -Fuad

View raw message