Transformations (T, for short) are a fundamental part of BI systems: They are the process through which data is converted from a source format (which can be relational or otherwise) into a relational data model that can be queried via BI tools.
In the late 1980s, the first BI data stacks started to materialize, and they typically looked like Figure 1. In this setup the ETL tool is responsible for pulling the data from the source systems (Extract), then it did the transformation into target data (Transform), then it finally loads the data into the target data mart (Load). ELT is similar to ETL but with one core difference: The heavy lifting of executing the transformation logic is pushed to the databases. In this model, the ETL tool is primarily a maintainer of the business logic and an orchestrator of the transformation work. The move to ELT worked because years ago, several RDBM systems started to evolve into MPP architectures (Massively Parallel Processing) supporting execution across a number of servers. However, the RDBMSs were created to do queries (Q for short), and not batch transformations. As the industry struggled with database Q performance getting bogged down by T, and by missing T completion SLAs, a new solution evolved: Apache Hadoop, a distributed data storage and processing system built from the ground up to be massively scalable (thousands of servers) using industry-standard hardware. Now that Hadoop has been commercially available in the market for years, hundreds of organizations are moving the T function from their databases to Hadoop.
We define Return on Byte (ROB) as the ratio of the value of a byte divided by the cost of storing that byte. While the unstructured and historical bytes in aggregate have a very high value, the individual bytes have very little value.
In addition to being a great system for doing T, Hadoop is also very good at doing Q for high-granularity and historical data (i.e.
Flexibility is one of the three key differences between traditional RDBMSs and Big Data platforms like Hadoop and Impala (the other two differences being massive scalability and storage economics).
For RDBMSs a schema has to be defined first, then the input data converted from its original native format to the proprietary storage format of the database.
For example, in your day-to-day BI job, you might get a new question from your business analyst that isn’t modeled appropriately in your data model. Impala, and Hadoop at large, get their flexibility from employing a schema-on-read model versus schema-on-write. Moving data with low value density to passive archival systems, aka data graveyards, leads to a significant loss of value since while that data is of low value on a per byte basis, it is extremely valuable in aggregate. The descriptive data-model agility of Hadoop and Impala makes them a very powerful tool for exploring all of your data and extracting new value that you couldn’t have been able to find before due to the rigid schemas of RDBMSs.
This is exectly what we ensiion to use Hadoop as ETL platform to store massive source data and provide a single data respository for enterprise data feed to Data Warehouse or Data Marts so that data intake will be uplifted to enterprise level – done once and feed all . As a startup we can only invest capital on proven products and rather spend operational expenditure when possible to retain the agility to grow, shrink, abandon, or raise architectures quickly in reaction to customer demand and product development. An alternative would be a mixed cluster with spot and on-demand instances or a full spot-instance cluster. Is this the best direction to go, versus purchasing you own cloud infrastructure in the long term? I guess in your case data is not dictating the cluster sizing at all which is not the case always. However, EMR is very comfortable in this scenario and especially if your frequency of data processing is low, i.e.
We’ve been delivering authoritative market analysis and perspectives, week-in and week-out for more than a decade. And make sure to keep a close eye on our research and commentary arm, GSV Tomorrow, where you’ll find original GSV insights, plus curated content revolving around our key Growth Themes. Big data servers are on the rise, with hyper-scale computers such as the ones used at Google, Amazon or Facebook making up just ~10% of all servers today and expected to be 17% by 2015, according to Gartner. What’s important to understand is that we have entered an Era in which Data is the new Currency for Computing.
Young, pure-play Cloud Computing businesses are showing strong momentum in recent months and triggered a new wave of investors interest.
Looking at where things are heading, we believe that Data in the Cloud will be at the core of any successful businesses.
Currently, we are in a transformational phase with many new ideas and businesses being created. Moving large amounts of data from point A to point B (even inside a company’s own database) is often a huge burden as it requires resources and costs money.
Cloud services for businesses have been around already for some time and new ones continue to emerge as they provide critical business tools in a data driven world. Cloud computing and data services are literally exploding and are becoming a key part for any modern business. IPOs continued to be strong with six companies going public last week and the average first day pop at a strong 44%.
Despite some recent pullbacks of our favorite growth companies, we remain bullish on the leaders with the conviction that fundamentals will drive stocks higher. There was a lot of bubblin activity in the Cloud and Big Data space last week — or as we call it — the Big Cloud space. Meanwhile, Hadoop leader Cloudera announced it is now expanding its partner ecosystem and bringing its Apache Hadoop data processing framework to public cloud services from IBM, Verizon, and Savvis. Cloudera and Hortonworks are the two leading companies in the Hadoop space and are both very high on our priority list.
In the social networking space, one company that’s been pushing up on our radar is local network platform Nextdoor. For more in-depth insights and analysis, subscribe to GSV's A 2 Apple as well as other growth-oriented newsletters.
Cost-per-performance, not cost-per-capacity, turns out to be the better metric for evaluating the true value of SSDs. In the Big Data ecosystem, solid-state drives (SSDs) are increasingly considered a viable, higher-performance alternative to rotational hard-disk drives (HDDs). Recently, Cloudera engineers did such a study based on a combination of SSDs and HDDs, with the goal of determining to what extent SSDs accelerate different MapReduce workloads, as well as the optimal configurations for getting the best performance on each workload. For a new cluster, SSDs deliver up to 70 percent higher MapReduce performance compared to HDDs of equal aggregate IO bandwidth.
On average, SSDs show 2.5x higher cost-per-performance, a gap far narrower than the 50x difference in cost-per-capacity. These results are based on running MapReduce v2 (MR2) on YARN in Cloudera Enterprise 5 Beta 1, on physical clusters, comparing HDDs with PCI Express (PCIe) SSDs.
We used the Linux collectl tool to verify that these two behaviors indeed hold for the MapReduce jobs used in our tests (see appendix). For hybrid clusters (both SSDs and HDDs), using SSDs for intermediate shuffle data leads to significant performance gains.
We used PCIe SSDs with 1.3TB capacity with a list price of US$14,000 each, and SATA HDDs with 2TB capacity with a list price of US$400 each. To get a sense of the user-visible storage bandwidth without HDFS and MapReduce, we measured the duration of copying a 100GB file to each storage device. The SSD and HDD-11 setups allow us to compare SSDs versus HDDs on an equal-bandwidth basis. We use collectl to track IO size, counts, bytes, merges to each storage device, as well as network and CPU utilization. We use default MapReduce configurations in CDH 5 Beta 1, aside from map output compression, discussed below. Note that the jobs here are IO-heavy jobs selected and sized specifically to compare two different storage media. General trend: SSD is better than HDD-11 for all jobs, with and without intermediate data compression. SSD benefits shuffle, with improvements correlated to large shuffle size: SSD does benefit shuffle, as seen in TeraSort and Shuffle workloads for uncompressed intermediate data.
Our goal here is to compare adding an SSD or many HDDs to an existing cluster, and to compare the various configurations possible in a hybrid SSD-HDD cluster. For default configurations, a Hybrid cluster offers lower than expected performance: The graph below compares job durations for the HDD-6, HDD-11, and Hybrid setups. On a Hybrid cluster, when HDFS and shuffle use separate storage media, the benefits depend on workload: The default Hybrid configuration assigns HDDs and SSD to both the HDFS and shuffle local directories. So, to fully utilize the SSD, we need to split the SSD into multiple directories to maintain equal bandwidth per local directory. The graph below shows the performance of the split-SSD setup, compared against the HDD-6, HDD-11, and Hybrid-default setups.
This differs from the cost-per-capacity metric ($-per-TB) that appears more frequently in HDD versus SSD comparisons.
From our tests, SSDs have up to 70 percent higher performance, for 2.5x higher $ per performance (average performance divided by cost). Enterprise data hubs (EDHs) enable data to be ingested, processed, and analyzed in many different ways. Overall, SSD economics involves the interplay between ever-improving software and hardware, as well as ever-evolving customer workloads. Karthik Kambatla is a member of the Platform Engineering team at Cloudera and a Hadoop committer.
Below find collectl data, showing TeraSort and WordCount macro-benchmarks that have non-negligible data in all IO stages.
To confirm that these SSDs have higher sequential IO size than HDDs in general, we copied a series of large files to each storage medium, with collectl showing KB-per-IO nearly identical to the values in the table below.
Just so we can be sure about what you’re asking: is your request for de-normalized duration times? Thanks for the information, been wondering this myself lately given the Amazon C3 instances which have SSDs (which is not a lot) but also can have large storage attached.
Any pointers on how one would configure Cloudera to take advantage of both storage types within the same instance? That was what we were told the price was for the Fusion-IO at that time we did the benchmarks.
So, can you explain the implication of your explanation “When we analyzed collectl data, it turns out that our SSD is capable of roughly 2x the sequential IO size of the hard disks”. So I did bet on Hadoop, and Apache HBase in due course, as I failed to store that many small files in HDFS directly, or combine and maintain them.
Sure, if those updates were rather rare, one could (and did) build purely MapReduce based solutions, using ETL style workflows that merged changes as part of the overall data pipeline.
On the HBase side, you can store the data differently as well, since you have the power to embed or nest dependent entities into the main record. How could you handle the SCD problem in either HDFS with Parquet format, or with HBase as a row-based, random access store? With HBase, there is an inherent cost to converting data into binary representation and back again. You have a choice to store every data point separately or combine them into larger entities, for example an Apache Avro record, to improve scan performance. For HDFS, you do not have the freedom to access data based on specific keys, like HBase offers. Conversely, it is much easier to store as much as data as you want in HDFS than it is in HBase. That is pretty much exactly what HBase compactions do: rewrite files asynchronously to keep them fresh. So after seeing how storing is in the end just physics—since you have to convert and ship data during reads and writes—how does that concept translate to Impala and HBase?
One approach to judge is the total cost of ownership (TCO): How often do you have to split the data to make each work? Recent efforts in HDFS also point to this conclusion as you can now pin hot datasets in memory, and in the future will be able to share this read-only data between OS processes without any further copying. I would like to know your view on which system could handle the no of concurrent sessions better?
HP Taps Vertica For SQL On HadoopHP brings fast, familiar SQL querying to Hadoop using Vertica database. In the works for months and partially exposed this summer through an earlier Vertica release, HP Vertica for SQL on Hadoop promises what other tools in this class promise: fast and familiar SQL-based querying on top of the increasingly popular big data store. SQL capabilities such as joins and merges are often lacking in "immature" Hadoop-native products, according to Sarsfield, and he added that HP customers report that they are "constantly running into bugs and stability issues with some of those products," though he declined to be specific about which products are buggy.
As for other relational databases that have been ported to run on top of Hadoop, such as Pivotal's HAWQ, based on the Greenplum database management system, or the Actian Analytics Platform SQL Hadoop Edition, based on Vectorwise, HP executives claimed that HP Vertica for SQL on Hadoop offers superior scalability and performance. HP claims more than 100 customers are working with Vertica 7.1, the summer release that first exposed SQL-on-Hadoop functionality.
HP's superiority claims aside, Vertica for SQL on Hadoop attractions include distribution-agnostic compatibility with Apache Hadoop, Cloudera, Hortonworks, or MapR deployments. HP utilities let you manage Vertica's use of nodes, memory, and compute capacity, while the Hadoop cluster is managed with separate tools. Where Hadoop-native SQL-On-Hadoop options like Hive, Impala, and Drill rely on Hadoop 2.0's YARN resource management and Hadoop-native security and data-governance systems, Vertica (like Pivotal HAWQ) does not run on YARN and has its own administrative and security controls.
Microsoft, Oracle, and Teradata have all stopped short of porting their databases to run on top of Hadoop. But big data demands more than just SQL analysis, because it involves data that can't be organized into columns and rows. HP executives said the Vertica community is experimenting with software that will run open source R analytics on the distributed database, but the vendor itself has no public roadmap to productize and support that software.
Apply now for the 2015 InformationWeek Elite 100, which recognizes the most innovative users of technology to advance a company's business goals.
Doug Henschen is Executive Editor of InformationWeek, where he covers the intersection of enterprise applications with information management, business intelligence, big data and analytics.

The Hadoop SQL Edition is based on Actian Vector, formerly Vectorwise, the current holder of several top TPC-H non-cluster benchmark query speed records. IBM has offered IBM Big SQL as a native SQL-on-Hadoop option, but I haven't heard much about it other than IBM statements.
In this post, I’m going to describe the three main ones (reflected in the post’s title) that we see across Cloudera’s growing customer base. For example, if it is discovered that part of the ETL logic is incorrect for the last three months, the transformations have to be redone.
Some of the work is pushed to the source databases (downstream), and some to the target databases (upstream).
Basically, the ETL tool is no longer in the critical path of data flow, and is simply there to manage the execution as opposed to perform it. That parallelism made the RDBMS a much better place to do the heavy lifting of the transformation versus the ETL tool.
So, as data sizes started to grow again, not only did this approach lead to missing ETL SLA windows (Service Level Agreements), it started missing the Q performance SLAs, too.
Furthermore, Hadoop was built to be very flexible in terms of accepting data of any type, regardless of structure. It is surprising how much faster these systems get once voluminous unstructured data is moved out of them. Analytical RDBMSs are built to be very low-latency OLAP systems for running repetitive queries on extremely high-value bytes (hence they cost a significant premium on a per-TB basis). Obviously, the critically imperative data, the data with the highest value density (lots of dollars per byte), deserves to bypass all the long lines to arrive to the decision makers as soon as possible.
It does have benefits though — by parsing the data and laying it out efficiently at write-time, the RDBMSs are able to do many optimizations to enable the OLAP queries to finish extremely fast. You are now faced with a dilemma: How can I be sure this question is important enough for me to change all the business logic necessary to expose the new underlying data for that question? Then, once you find the true value, and decide that this is a question you want to ask over and over again, then you will have the justification necessary to go through adding this new attribute or dimension to your pristine data model. In other words, the schema is described at the latest stage possible (aka “late binding”) when the question is being asked as opposed to the earliest stage possible when the data is being born. Impala allows you to continue to extract the latent value from your data by powering an active archive that is economically suited for the value of the data. You truly gain the ability to explore the unknown unknowns, and not just the known unknowns. This article explores the price tag of switching to a small, permanent EC2 Cloudera cluster from AWS EMR.
The decision was born out of increasing demand for computing time and the lack of interactivity of a setup that required long startup time and had no user-friendly interface to work with. We mostly use Hue, Hive, Oozie, and Sqoop at the moment, but use-cases for Flume and other services are already being discussed. This requires that you can deal with losing a cluster (or parts of it) for a period of time.
Companies or departments trialing new products or changing architectures have the opportunity to pilot them with modest funds before applying for substantial investments.
I’m not sure what would be the recommended number of nodes (probably 2 masters and 4 workers).
Sign up so we can update you with new releases of A2Apple and our other daily and weekly publications — sent straight to your email.
In the past 20 years, using services and storing data has moved from physical to digital, and the trend has been accelerating in the most recent years.
For some perspective, Amazon’s EC2 cluster computer with its 17,024 nodes ranks only 127th in the list of the World’s super computers. Having large amounts of data is certainly a good basis for any Internet-based business, just like having a lot of money is generally a positive thing.
Oracle developed its own “cloud” and provides a portfolio of new applications that can be delivered over the web.
They provide cloud-based solutions that are transforming corporate computing with faster and more efficient models.
While having A-class engineers who are able to play with data is crucial, making data accessible to the average user is also an emerging trend. Dropbox, Box, Evernote are all great example as they allow users to store and share data on their own clouds without need for physical storage (on a hard drive), and provide automatic syncing across the user’s multiple devices.
Knowing what the data means, where to find it and how to store it is a key ingredient for any Internet driven company. Therefore it is increasingly important for a company to have an intelligent process on how to allocate its data, how to store it, and how to find it.
Netflix was one of the pioneers for offering on-demand videos streamed directly from the cloud. Salesforce was among the first pure play cloud-services and while already a $21 billion business it is still on the forefront of innovation.
Twitter is expected to go public later this week and had already posted its Q3 results a few weeks ago. The partner companies will resell Cloudera’s Hadoop distribution as an instance which runs on their own cloud systems. Other Big Cloud companies that we are watching closely include MongoDB, MuSigma, and Actifio. What’s particularly impressive is that the San Francisco-based startup has attracted some of the top investors with Benchmark, Bezos Expeditions, Google Ventures, and now also announcing that Kleiner Perkins and Tiger Global invested $60 million in a series C financing. Berlin-based SoundCloud which lets users upload sound files and considers itself as the YouTube for sound is now 250 million unique users strong and growing at a ~60% rate.  The new integration will let users chose cover pictures for music albums from Instagram. Each storage device is mounted with the Linux ext4 file system, with default options and 4KB block size. This test indicates the SSDs can do roughly 1.3GBps sequential read and write, while the HDDs have roughly 120MBps sequential read and write. Each is either a common benchmark, or a job constructed specifically to isolate a stage of the MapReduce IO pipeline.
In general, real-world customer workloads have a variety of sizes and create load for multiple resources including IO, CPU, memory, and network. Let’s look at a straightforward comparison between the SSD (1 SSD) and HDD-11 (11 HDDs) configurations.
Data from collectl indicates that shuffle read-and-write IO sizes are one-half to three-quarters those of HDFS, in agreement with our discussion of MapReduce IO patterns previously.
When we analyzed collectl data, it turns out that our SSD is capable of roughly 2x the sequential IO size of the hard disks. For brevity, we show the results with uncompressed intermediate data, since that setting more clearly highlights the tradeoffs.
However, even with its additional hardware bandwidth (add one SSD versus add five HDDs), the Hybrid setup offers no improvement over HDD-11.
Splitting SSD into 10 local directories invariably leads to a major improvement over the default Hybrid setup. However, from an economic point of view, the choice of storage media depends on the cost-per-performance for each.
Hence, the choice of storage media needs to consider the aggregate performance impact across the entire production workload. To fully understand the implications of SSDs for EDHs, we need to study the tradeoffs for other components such as Apache HBase, Cloudera Impala, and Cloudera Search.
The precise trade-off between SSDs, HDDs, and memory deserves regular re-examination over time.
The data confirms that shuffle IO sizes are generally smaller than HDFS IO sizes, and that SSD sequential (HDFS) IO sizes are ~2x that of HDDs.
However, TestDFSIO is producing de-dupable data, which I’m not sure is a real life scenario.
I recall vividly that in 2007, I was faced to store 1 billion XML documents and make them accessible as well as searchable. I probably had the first-ever HBase production cluster online in 2008, since the other users were still in development or non-commercial. Seemingly every other month, a new framework that solves the mother of all problems is announced—but luckily, the pace at which they join the Hadoop ecosystem is rather stable.
The former was the workhorse for anything batch oriented that needed high-sequential throughput as fast as disks could spin. But for truly random access to data and being able to serve the same there was only HBase, the Hadoop Database.
Now, you have an SQL-based query engine that can query data stored natively in HDFS (and also in HBase, but that is a different topic I will address soon).
This is different from the star schema that you may retain in the HDFS version of the data.
I have run some tests recently and the bottom line is that schema design in HBase is ever so important.
Rather, you have to scan some amount of files to find the information for which you are looking.
If you update data in HDFS, you need to write a new delta file and eventually merge those into the augmented original, creating a new file with the updated data. Delta files here are the so-called flush files and the original files are the older HFiles from previous flush or compaction runs.
You need to create a temporary table, then UNION ALL the delta with the original file, and finally swap out the file.
For Search you have to build separate indexes, which usually does not involve duplicate existing ones but rather enabling them in the first place.
HDFS can cache data, HBase has the block cache, Search stores index structures, and Spark can pin intermediate data in memory for fast iterations. Many decisions in organizations around the world have been ultimately made based on exactly that: it is not that one solution is better, much faster, or easier to manage than the other.
Your post help us to understand on identifying the right use case that fit for Impala or HBase. You could call that aggressive and forward-thinking, but then, HP, Pivotal, Actian, and others are market challengers with far fewer deployments to defend than incumbents such as Oracle, Microsoft, and Teradata. Pivotal, for example, is touting MADlib for machine learning and statistical analysis, while Actian recently added a graph analysis engine. But the real test of success will be its selection and use in place of Hadoop-native SQL-on-Hadoop options or Hadoop-to-database connections offered by the likes of Oracle, Microsoft, and Teradata.
Winners will be recognized at the InformationWeek Conference, April 27-28, 2015, at the Mandalay Bay in Las Vegas.
This problem often takes weeks to be corrected, as the ETL tool has to redo all that past work while continuing to do the work for new daily data as it arrives. It is worth noting that some of the ETL tool vendors tried to parallelize their systems but few succeeded. If you have a nine-hour transformation job running on 20 servers, and at the eighth hour four of these servers go down, the job will still finish — you will not need to rerun it from scratch. This allows you to take your existing business transformation logic and define it through the ETL tool as usual, then push the T execution to happen inside of Hadoop. However, the original unstructured data before going through the transformation phase is too voluminous by nature leading to a low value per byte. The high cost to store and query that first-class data is justified since its value is congruently high on a per byte basis.
Furthermore, by having a well-governed static schema across the enterprise, different groups can collaborate and know what the different columns mean. Hadoop with Impala allows us to augment RDBM system with the capability to do such explorations. It’s a chicken-and-egg problem because you can’t know the true value of the question without having the capability to ask the question at first place! It takes the guesswork out of the process, it allows us to iterate quickly, fail-fast, and finally pick the winning insights in a much more agile way. T is much better suited for a batch processing system like Hadoop which offers the agility of absorbing data of any type, scalably processing that data, and at an economical cost matched to the value of such raw data. In particular, Hue, a browser-based interface to Hadoop and its services like Hive, was a service we wanted.
The hassle-free installation of services with the Cloudera Manager is an added bonus when we want to experiment with them.
Spot instances are pulled from you without a warning when your bid price is below market rate. If you can live with downtime then your own server plugged into your Internet connection may do. China University of Defense Technology’s Tianhe-2 computer recently captured the top spot with its 3.1 million nodes, followed by the DOE’s Titan and IBM’s Sequoia. However, it is also crucial to have the supporting analytics, tools and intelligence in order to get real value. It also offers a solution to customers that creates a private cloud, sitting in the back of that customer’s firewall, but being managed by Oracle.
A good example is Workday which went public a year ago and saw its valuation grow to $13 billion, just eight years into its making.
Think back 25 years when computers were in their infancy and only experts were able to work on them. Companies dealing with large amounts of data are starting to encounter problems on how to store and analyze their data. Hadoop, which is a massively scalable storage and batch data processing system, is gaining strong popularity across businesses for improving their data analytics.
New and emerging companies include SugarCRM, a CRM provider that relies on open source solutions.

Manufacturing conditions in the US continued to improve in October despite the government shutdown.
Last Wednesday, Facebook reported strong third quarter results with 60% revenue growth and nearly half of its advertising revenue now coming from mobile.
Other likely additions could include users adding soundtracks to their profiles, but this remains unknown for now. When multiple tasks are scheduled on the same machine, they can access the disks on the machine in parallel, with each task accessing its own input split or output partition. Otherwise, the machines are Intel Xeon 2-socket, 8-core, 16-thread systems, with 10Gbps Ethernet and 48GB RAM. The HDD-6, HDD-11, and Hybrid setups allow us to investigate the effects of adding either HDDs or SSDs to an existing cluster. Map output compression is turned on by default in CDH, as most common kinds of data are readily compressible.
The graphs below show job durations for the two storage options, with the SSD values normalized against the HDD-11 values for each job. Note that these jobs do not involve large amounts of shuffle data, so compressing intermediate data has no visible effect.
As the IO path is not the bottleneck for such jobs, the choice of storage media has little impact on performance. Note that on an equal bandwidth basis, “adding one SSD” should ideally be compared to “adding 11 HDDs”. Doing so requires two more cluster configurations: HDDs for HDFS with SSD for intermediate data, and vice versa.
In our single-wave map output example, the SSDs would then receive 10x the data directed at each HDD, written at 10x the speed, and complete in the same amount of time. As the primary benefit of SSD is high performance rather than high capacity, we believe storage vendors and customers should also track $-per-performance for different storage media. Customers can consider paying a premium cost to obtain up to 70 percent higher performance.
The precise improvement depends on how compressible the data is across all datasets, and the ratio of IO versus CPU load across all jobs.
These components are much more sensitive to latency and random access — they aggressively cache data in memory, and cache misses heavily affect performance.
Whether the factory defaults should be reset would depend on hardware vendors’ testing on a broad class of workloads beyond MapReduce. We see evolution rather than revolution; those new projects have to prove themselves before being deemed a candidate for inclusion. With Impala, you can query data similar to commercial MPP databases; all the servers in a cluster work together to receive the user query, distribute the work amongst them, read data locally at raw disk speeds, and stream the results back to the user, without ever materializing intermediate data or spinning up new OS processes like MapReduce does. Probably not, as it still deals with immutable files that were staged by ETL workflows higher up the data ingest and processing pipeline (also see this earlier post).
Suffice to say that you have laid out data in a relational database that allows you to update dimension tables over time. You can also create a very flexible schema that allows you to cover many aspects of usually normalized data structures.
It is basically Amdahl’s Law at play, which says that some sequential part of an algorithm defines the overall performance of an operation. For Hive this is implemented under HIVE-5317 though that this is for slow-changing data mostly, while HBase is suited also for fast-changing data. But the drawback is that you have to read data from more files, and if your use case does not allow you to do some sort of grouping of data, then reads will be slower—and more memory is used to hold the block data. Disks are much more affordable than memory (factor 400 and above), so in practice, we often opt for the duplication of data on disk, but not in memory. For HBase and Search, their use cases are still quite distinct from the other two, but with HBase snapshots and being able to read that directly from HDFS shows that there is a connection—even if it is still in the form of a rather wobbly suspension bridge. And HP says its per-node pricing model is "highly competitive," though it declined to release pricing details. Anybody at IBM care to share highlights on SQL analysis of Hadoop data options other than Big SQL?
If you discover a human error in your ETL logic and need to rerun T for the last three months, you can temporarily add a few nodes to the cluster to get extra processing speed, and then decommission those nodes after the ETL catch-up is done. This is also true for historical data, since as data gets older, the value on a per-byte basis gets lower. However, with Big Data, you are collecting and keeping all of the raw most granular events over many years of history. So we want the OLAP optimization and governance of traditional RDBMSs, but we need to augment that with the ability to be agile. Which setup is efficient, avoiding upfront capital investment, and achievable with in-house know-how? Our cluster is comparatively modest, merely four m1.large EC2s on EMR, and there is significant uncertainty around how fast and large it will grow in the future.
It proved very beneficial to opening access to our data, our cross-team development process, and improving business intelligence. It operates nearly its whole business on EC2 using Hadoop and Cassandra clusters, growing and shrinking them with demand. You may also want to review the free Cloudera, MapR and Hortonworks options if you do not need professional support and can do without some features (MapR, Cloudera). Generating enormous amounts of data without having the right infrastructure and tools is meaningless and inefficient for running any business today. Apple’s iCloud was an early attempt to become the digital platform for its users and while Apple was somewhat successful with its app platform, it has largely failed in the Social and Storages space. What’s appealing about its software solution is that it is tailor-made for a mobile workforce, can be easily upgraded, and increases efficiency while reducing cost to large customers. One of Steve Jobs‘ biggest achievements was to make technology user-friendly and to combine it with art. Many businesses deal with their own data as well as third party data flowing trough their network. Facebook was one of the biggest contributors to the code of the Apache Hadoop and they developed internal resources to support themselves; so did Yahoo. Similarly, Spotify, Deezer, Soundcloud, are all revolutionizing the music industry by providing the same on-demand service for music. Sequoia-backed MeLLmo provides a new solution on how people interact with enterprise data on their smartphones and tablets. Nextdoor seems to be gaining a lot of traction by connecting the local community and by providing an easy way for users to discover services like babysitting, yard maintenance, local retailers and restaurants. Tuning compression allows us to examine tradeoffs in storage media under two different IO and CPU mixes. The first graph shows results with intermediate data compressed, and the second one without. However, one would expect the simple hybrid to perform half way between assigning SSD to intermediate data and HDFS. SSDs could potentially act as a cost-effective cache between memory and disk in the storage hierarchy, but we need measurements on real clusters to verify. It puts MapReduce into a batch-oriented corner, and lets standard BI tools connect directly with Hadoop data. In practice, I often end up in situations where the customer is really trying to figure out where one starts and the other ends.
Those are then JOINed (the SQL operation) with the fact tables when a report needs to be generated. And for HBase (this also applies to any other data store that handles small data points), this is the deserialization of the cells, aka the key-value pair. This is usually a column in the data that has a decent cardinality: not too many values, not too few.
In the end, you only have a scarce resource that you can use one way or another—a tradeoff that needs to be handled carefully.
They close the gap toward the stretch area where NoSQL is out of its comfort zone and batch processing simply too slow. So in many ways, archival systems are where data goes to die, despite still having a ton of value. This new system complements the MapReduce batch-transformation system so that you can get the best of both worlds: fast T and economical Q. Though the value of that data in aggregate is very high, the value on a per-byte basis is very small and doesn’t justify a first-class ticket.
When you are running a query inside Impala it then parses the file and extracts the relevant schema at run time.
Lastly, Cloudera comes with the Cloudera Manager, which streamlines managing clusters — installing services or upgrading software clusterwide. The extrem version of that is spiking load for data mining where you may want to spawn hundreds or thousands of tiny instances to crawl the web or extract data. If it is for production use and business critical then of course professional services apply.
The real ROI comes from having an efficient way to collect, analyze, allocate and store data.
Amazon’s EC2 cluster computer has gained very strong traction and is a leading data host for many of today’s emerging businesses. Medallia, which received $35 million from Sequoia, uses text analytics, looks at data flow, measures customer feedback, and provides real-time solutions for a continuos improvement of a company’s customer experience. Cloudera, the emerging leader in Hadoop, has a group of talented engineers and infrastructure experts who have taken the open source Apache Hadoop code and combined it with best practices, Q&A, and Software Development Life Cycle. Apple’s iTunes itself is getting disrupted as people increasingly opt to pay Spotify a monthly fee and have easy access to any songs on any of their devices, compared to purchasing songs one by one and having to sync them across multiple devices via iTunes.
IBM’s offer which will include  Intel Xeon 5620-based server with 24GB of RAM and two 500GB SATA storage drives will start at $699 per month.
Today, Nextdoor is used in 22,527 neighborhoods in the US, which is up from 5,694 a year ago… nearly a 300% increase. Analysis of our customer traces indicate that many deployments indeed have a per-reduce shuffle granularity of just a few MBs (and sometimes less). The data in TeraSort and Shuffle are both highly compressible, allowing compressed intermediate data to fit in the buffer cache.
If you move this data over into Hadoop and especially HDFS, you have many choices to engineer a suitable solution.
It represents a fixed cost, while the variable cost is based on how large the cell is (for loading and copying it in memory). Impala turns Hadoop into an “active archive”; now you can keep your historical data accessible, but more importantly, you can extract the latent value from it (as opposed to keeping it dormant in a passive archival system).
Instead of grounding that data, it is much better to give it an “economy-class” ticket, which enables it to eventually arrive albeit a bit behind the first-class data. If this occurs at specific times or intervals then cloud computing can make you live easy and reduce costs (good example is EMR).
Many startups focused on each of these segments are bubblin up and seeing rising valuations as VCs interest is also moving up.
Salesforce was the pioneer for customer relationship management and continues to have a leading position in cloud-based services.
Cloudera provides the service to large companies that deal with data, and adds professional support and training. The company has yet to generate revenue but its CEO Nirav Tolia doesn’t seem to have that as a priority just yet and is more focused on getting the product right.
When we increase the data size per job 10x, the SSD benefits are visible even with compressed intermediate data. Or more generically, the partition size should not get you into the small-files problem mentioned previously.
This economy-class option is much better than not arriving at all (passive tape archive), and hence suffering the opportunity cost of not letting that data “fly”.
New data can start flowing into the system in any shape or form, and months later you can change your schema parser to immediately expose the new data elements without having to go through an extensive database reload or column recreation. In the long run, we will discuss whether owning the hardware is not a more cost-effective solution. IBM is pushing hard to be among the leaders, focused on government and large customer, but recently lost a major deal with the CIA to Amazon.
Most jobs will require data analytical skills, cloud computing will be driving technology, and individuals will need to know how to “work” the data. There, when the NodeManager decides to write out intermediate shuffle data, it will pick the 11 HDD local directories and the single SSD directory a round-robin fashion.
It includes on-demand integration with Hadoop for smooth interoperability, but is it's own separate entity.
EMC has created a leading document management system in the corporate world, and its friend VMware has done well in the data virtualization space. Several young companies are focused on solutions and have already attracted strong interest. We are moving Nextdoor higher on our list as there is good traction and a very strong group of investors. Hence, when the job is optimized for a single wave of map tasks, each local directory receives the same amount of data, and faster progress on the SSD is held up by slower progress on the HDDs.
Trifacta is a new business which is funded by Andreessen Horrowitz and offers data management solutions that enable the non-PhD person to handle complicated tasks.

Raspberry pi owncloud speed up letra
Panda cloud antivirus 2.2 offline installer


  1. 07.01.2015 at 19:45:29

    Which allows to backup used over the.

    Author: red_life_girl
  2. 07.01.2015 at 17:31:11

    Right cloud backup solution for your other products on the market dropbox launched a free.