Hi Tyler... Thank you very much for the response. It is nice to know that there is some possibility this might work. :)
Regards, Daniel Morton On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 2:03 PM, Tyler Hobbs <ty...@datastax.com> wrote: > You can get away with a 1 to 2GB heap if you don't put too much pressure > on it. I commonly run stress tests against a 400M heap node while > developing and I almost never see OutOfMemory errors, but I'm not keeping a > close eye on latency and throughput, which will be impacted when the JVM GC > is running nonstop. > > Cassandra doesn't tend to become CPU bound, so an i3 will probably work > fine. > > > On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Daniel Morton <dan...@djmorton.com>wrote: > >> Hello All. >> >> I am new to Cassandra and I am evaluating it for a project I am working >> on. >> >> This project has several distribution models, ranging from a cloud >> distribution where we would be collecting hundreds of millions of rows per >> day to a single box distribution where we could be collecting as few as 5 >> to 10 million rows per day. >> >> Based on the experimentation and testing I have done so far, I believe >> that Cassandra would be an excellent fit for our large scale cloud >> distribution, but from a maintenance/support point of view, we would like >> to keep our storage engine consistent across all distributions. >> >> For our single box distribution, it could be running on a box as small as >> an i3 processor with 4 GB of RAM and about 180 GB of disk base available >> for use... A rough estimate would be that our storage engine could be >> allowed to consume about half of the processor and RAM resources. >> >> I know that running Cassandra on a single instance throws away the >> majority of the benefits of using a distribution storage solution >> (distributed writes and reads, fault tolerance, etc.), but it might be >> worth the trade off if we don't have to support two completely different >> storage solutions, even if they were hidden behind an abstraction layer >> from the application's point of view. >> >> My question is, are we completely out-to-lunch thinking that we might be >> able to run Cassandra in a reasonable way on such an under-powered box? I >> believe I recall reading in the Datastax documentation that the minimum >> recommended system requirements are 8 to 12 cores and 8 GB of RAM, which is >> a far cry from the lowest-end machine I'm considering. >> >> Any info or help anyone could provide would be most appreciated. >> >> Regards, >> >> Daniel Morton >> > > > > -- > Tyler Hobbs > DataStax <http://datastax.com/> >
