Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-hbase-user-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: (qmail 50766 invoked from network); 6 Apr 2010 00:24:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 6 Apr 2010 00:24:32 -0000 Received: (qmail 23674 invoked by uid 500); 6 Apr 2010 00:24:31 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-hbase-user-archive@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 23551 invoked by uid 500); 6 Apr 2010 00:24:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact hbase-user-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: hbase-user@hadoop.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list hbase-user@hadoop.apache.org Received: (qmail 23543 invoked by uid 99); 6 Apr 2010 00:24:31 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 06 Apr 2010 00:24:31 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of imyousuf@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.48 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.212.48] (HELO mail-vw0-f48.google.com) (209.85.212.48) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 06 Apr 2010 00:24:24 +0000 Received: by vws9 with SMTP id 9so1230531vws.35 for ; Mon, 05 Apr 2010 17:24:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:received:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=q5OmPi7FxErnNZTBfhfPI33sTp6ovs6pPECyLq3UMfo=; b=IBWDxqK9HVxu2+uXG8f683rzyZ96eteETh6z+on4DKY3tsHaEUzEg5fqQlM2JgDFnL i+xD6790niJrwxLzvXGDOvL3s8r1XWxcDLRzmUefVinuBiEyTcLF6CF6FenRSgbOrx0k dtO1zHo40JtEudmbDoiZyvFwoiIy/YVk4tjTU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=x3dZkGYnOzKqozuRpjWoyUzs6S9ysjRFhzJJ/AUgYgurl343djXS365RlkG5kbxwOF 4++btV+d3glk+jSU611G92s3AIVaETU5ivCO8SHCw32Nay3zEXZ3xW40QV+2bH2YW9Pm QnwdwxP85jkxf5+fhjahJoN0wIUyRD8lFCFq4= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.99.143 with HTTP; Mon, 5 Apr 2010 17:24:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4BBA2938.4030404@apache.org> References: <8D66B74984F9564BBB25C3C67D630F2D6671FDA1@SC-MBXC1.TheFacebook.com> <4BBA2938.4030404@apache.org> Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 06:09:03 +0545 Received: by 10.220.123.104 with SMTP id o40mr2989528vcr.208.1270513443274; Mon, 05 Apr 2010 17:24:03 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Subject: Re: About test/production server configuration From: Imran M Yousuf To: hbase-user@hadoop.apache.org Cc: Jonathan Gray Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 12:02 AM, Patrick Hunt wrote: > The ZK servers are sensitive to disk (io) latency. I just troubleshot an > issue last week where a user was seeing 80second (second!) latencies. > Turns out they were running zk server, namenode, tasktracker, and hbase > region server all on the same box, that box had a single spindle for all > io activity and was at 100% utilization for long periods of time. If > you want decent ZK API latencies (<100ms) you really need to ensure that > there's at least a separate spindle available for the ZK transaction logs= . > Great insight and info! So that means if ZK is using a separate spindle the rest can reside in the same spindle, at least in your case, nice! Thanks for the info, noting it. Imran > Patrick > > On 04/05/2010 11:11 AM, Jonathan Gray wrote: >> >> Imran, >> >> It's impossible to give good advice on cluster size and hardware >> configuration without some idea of the requirements. >> >> How much data? =A0How will the data be queried? =A0What kind of load do >> you expect? =A0You are going to be doing offline batch/MapReduce, >> online random access, as well as search all from the same nodes? >> This can be dangerous. >> >> I would strongly recommend against putting Hadoop+HBase on the same >> nodes as something like Solr, unless you have dedicated disks for >> each. =A0Also, don't forget about ZooKeeper which you definitely will >> need separate nodes/disks for if you will be co-locating so many >> other things. >> >> JG >> >>> -----Original Message----- From: Imran M Yousuf >>> [mailto:imyousuf@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 9:52 AM >>> To: hbase-user@hadoop.apache.org Subject: About test/production >>> server configuration >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> We are a startup who have decided to use HBase purely because we >>> want to take advantage of HDFS based reliability, redundancy, >>> MapReduce and BigTable. For that we are thinking to go for a test >>> environment with 5 servers and production environment with 10 >>> servers in both case the Hadoop cluster will be used for HBase + >>> MapReduce + Solr Index. >>> >>> Firstly, I would like some opinion on whether 10 servers is a good >>> number for all 3 purposes or not. Secondly what kind of test >>> environment is currently in use in different organizations. >>> Thirdly, I would like to learn some server configuration and >>> purchase price (with purchase location if possible). >>> >>> Waiting eagerly for some feedback. >>> >>> Thank you, >>> >>> -- Imran M Yousuf Entrepreneur& =A0Software Engineer Smart IT >>> Engineering Dhaka, Bangladesh Email: imran@smartitengineering.com >>> Blog: http://imyousuf-tech.blogs.smartitengineering.com/ Mobile: >>> +880-1711402557 > --=20 Imran M Yousuf Entrepreneur & Software Engineer Smart IT Engineering Dhaka, Bangladesh Email: imran@smartitengineering.com Blog: http://imyousuf-tech.blogs.smartitengineering.com/ Mobile: +880-1711402557