kudu-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mike Percy <mpe...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Kudu on top of Alluxio
Date Mon, 27 Mar 2017 18:01:34 GMT
+1 thanks for adding that Todd.


On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 9:55 AM, Todd Lipcon <todd@cloudera.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Mar 25, 2017 at 2:54 PM, Mike Percy <mpercy@apache.org> wrote:
>> Kudu currently relies on local storage on a POSIX file system. Right now
>> there is no support for S3, which would be interesting but is non-trivial
>> in certain ways (particularly if we wanted to rely on S3's replication and
>> disable Kudu's app-level replication).
>> I would suggest using only either EXT4 or XFS file systems for production
>> deployments as of Kudu 1.3, in a JBOD configuration, with one SSD per
>> machine for the WAL and with the data disks on either SATA or SSD drives
>> depending on the workload. Anything else is untested AFAIK.
> I would amend this and say that SSD for the WAL is nice to have, but not a
> requirement. We do lots of testing on non-SSD test clusters and I'm aware
> of many production clusters which also do not have SSD.
> -Todd
> --
> Todd Lipcon
> Software Engineer, Cloudera

View raw message