Hello,

I have been following this thread for some time now. I am very comfortable with 
the advantages of hdfs, but still have lingering questions about the usage of 
hdfs for general purpose storage (no mapreduce/hbase etc).

Can somebody shed light on what the limitations are on the number of files that 
can be stored. Is it limited in anyway by the namenode? The use case I am 
interested in is to store a very large number of relatively small files (1MB to 
25MB).

Interestingly, I saw a facebook presentation on how they use hbase/hdfs 
internally. Them seem to store all metadata in hbase and the actual 
images/files/etc in something called "haystack" (why not use hdfs since they 
already have it?). Anybody know what "haystack" is?

Thanks!
Chinmay



From: Jeff Hammerbacher [mailto:ham...@cloudera.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 3:31 PM
To: hdfs-user@hadoop.apache.org
Subject: Re: HDFS without Hadoop: Why?


  *   Large block size wastes space for small file.  The minimum file size is 1 
block.
That's incorrect. If a file is smaller than the block size, it will only 
consume as much space as there is data in the file.

  *   There are no hardlinks, softlinks, or quotas.
That's incorrect; there are quotas and softlinks.

Reply via email to