mahout-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Grant Ingersoll <gsing...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Re : Good starting instance for AMI
Date Tue, 19 Jan 2010 00:42:54 GMT

On Jan 18, 2010, at 3:15 PM, Ted Dunning wrote:

> Is there an important difference between creating an existing AMI or using
> an existing AMI with a startup script that populates everything from S3?
> 
> Building an AMI takes a few hours of time and is a total pain in the butt.
> My eventual result was that I didn't need to do it at all.
> 
> I found that I had roughly three levels of variation in my production
> systems:
> 
> - the OS
> - the infrastructural components like java, hadoop and zookeeeper
> - the application that I wanted to run
> 
> My initial thought was that the AMI should cover the first two aspects of
> variability.  But I also found that I wanted to change the version of the
> infrastructure stuff fairly often in development of the AMI and not
> infrequently in production.
> 
> For Mahout customers, I would imagine that there is a reasonable amount of
> variability in desired OS (Ubuntu versus Redhat versus Centos at least), JDK
> and Hadoop versions.  

I only see a need for two: the version in trunk and the one in latest release.

This is all well and good, but I have yet to see anyone say:  here's the AMI, the download
script and the instructions.  So I'm just going to go ahead with what I think is useful for
my needs, document it, and put it up there for people to use or not.  If anything, it will
be useful for me to do it since I've never setup a Hadoop cluster on EC2 before.  

-Grant
Mime
View raw message