Thanks for the info. That webpage turns out to be very instructive :) Regards, Ed
2011/11/11 Suraj Varma <svarma...@gmail.com> > Yes - it could be separated at the cost of network io and data locality. > > See this: > http://www.larsgeorge.com/2010/05/hbase-file-locality-in-hdfs.html > --Suraj > > On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 6:49 PM, edward choi <mp2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Pardon me for asking such a stupid question. > > > > I recently read an article about HBase basic architecture here: > > http://www.larsgeorge.com/2009/10/hbase-architecture-101-storage.html > > > > What really makes me wonder is, what if HBase is installed on machines > > where there is no HDFS? > > > > For example, there are ten linux machines (linux01, linux02, ... > linux10), > > on which Hadoop 0.20.2 is installed, linux01 being Namenode and > Jobtracker. > > > > Now, suppose that I install HBase on new computers linux11, linux12, > > linux13. Linux11 is the master and the rest are regionservers (Let's > > forget about zookeepers for argument's sake). > > If I configure hbase-site.xml so that hbase.rootdir would point to > > linux01, would this Hbase work properly? > > According to the article above, Hbase seems to have DFS clients of its > > own. So I thought HDFS and RegionServers could be separated. Am I > > right on this? > > > > Regards, > > Ed > > >
