Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Threaded View
Hadoop >> mail # user >> More cores Vs More Nodes ?


Copy link to this message
-
Re: More cores Vs More Nodes ?
Hey there,

I agree with Tom's response. One can decide it based on the type of jobs
you run. I have been working on Hive and I realized that increasing no. of
cores would give very good performance boost because joins and stuff are
compute oriented and consume a lot of CPU on reduce side. This may not be
the case with other applications (like HBase? )

Thanks

So I feel that you shou

On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 11:16 PM, Tom Deutsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> It also helps to know the profile of your job in how you spec the
> machines. So in addition to Brad's response you should consider if you
> think your jobs will be more storage or compute oriented.
>
> ------------------------------------------------
> Tom Deutsch
> Program Director
> Information Management
> Big Data Technologies
> IBM
> 3565 Harbor Blvd
> Costa Mesa, CA 92626-1420
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>
> Brad Sarsfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 12/13/2011 09:41 AM
> Please respond to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> To
> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> cc
>
> Subject
> RE: More cores Vs More Nodes ?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Praveenesh,
>
> Your question is not naïve; in fact, optimal hardware design can
> ultimately be a very difficult question to answer on what would be
> "better". If you made me pick one without much information I'd go for more
> machines.  But...
>
> It all depends; and there is no right answer.... :)
>
> More machines
>                 +May run your workload faster
>                 +Will give you a higher degree of reliability protection
> from node / hardware / hard drive failure.
>                 +More aggregate IO capabilities
>                 - capex / opex may be higher than allocating more cores
> More cores
>                 +May run your workload faster
>                 +More cores may allow for more tasks to run on the same
> machine
>                 +More cores/tasks may reduce network contention and
> increase increasing task to task data flow performance.
>
> Notice "May run your workload faster" is in both; as it can be very
> workload dependant.
>
> My Experience:
> I did a recent experiment and found that given the same number of cores
> (64) with the exact same network / machine configuration;
>                 A: I had 8 machines with 8 cores
>                 B: I had 28 machines with 2 cores (and 1x8 core head
> node)
>
> B was able to outperform A by 2x using teragen and terasort. These
> machines were running in a virtualized environment; where some of the IO
> capabilities behind the scenes were being regulated to 400Mbps per node
> when running in the 2 core configuration vs 1Gbps on the 8 core.  So I
> would expect the non-throttled scenario to work even better.
>
> ~Brad
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: praveenesh kumar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 8:51 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: More cores Vs More Nodes ?
>
> Hey Guys,
>
> So I have a very naive question in my mind regarding Hadoop cluster nodes
> ?
>
> more cores or more nodes - Shall I spend money on going from 2-4 core
> machines, or spend money on buying more nodes less core eg. say 2 machines
> of 2 cores for example?
>
> Thanks,
> Praveenesh
>
>
>
--
Regards,
Bharath .V
w:http://researchweb.iiit.ac.in/~bharath.v
NEW: Monitor These Apps!
elasticsearch, apache solr, apache hbase, hadoop, redis, casssandra, amazon cloudwatch, mysql, memcached, apache kafka, apache zookeeper, apache storm, ubuntu, centOS, red hat, debian, puppet labs, java, senseiDB