There are many businesses that want to profit from their own open source projects by including them or parts of them in other, proprietary works. The GPL essentially makes that impossible.

HDFS is not POSIX or mountable. So actually using the data from something that is expecting POSIX is going to painful. "But there is a FUSE plug-in!" Yes, there is, but you'll take a 60% perf hit using it, assuming that it still works in newer versions of Hadoop. See none of the hardcore devs actually use it, so there is a very good chance it is completely busted.

In any case, there are still problems around losing the fsimage and having no real HA for the NN, needing quite a bit of RAM for any significant amount of files, don't forget that 8TB now turns into at least 24TB counting the 3x replication factor, etc, etc, etc.

So no, really this isn't a solution for this particular problem.

The fuse support has likely gotten worse since no one on the core dev team really spends any time with it. I'd be surprised if it still compiles.

+1 on this one.

We've been using the Buffalo modified version of DD-WRT for a few months now. It replaced a Linksys E3k that was continually dropping connections. Overall, we're pretty happy with it (QoS, DHCP, etc). I'll definitely check on the link speed, although it is connected to DSL modem that can't do gigabit anyway. :)

It isn't. There is an incredible overuse of glibc/Linux-isms to the point that even porting it to another UNIX is difficult.

This isn't about Microsfot getting involved with open source. This is about Microsoft not getting left out. Beyond the countless startups, Apache Hadoop already has major players like Amazon, Dell, EMC, HP, IBM, NetApp, Oracle, VMware, ... trying to make a dent in the community in some form or another. Hell, I have a SuperMicro catalog on my desk emblazoned with the Apache Hadoop logo all over it. Like Oracle, they are coming in very late to the party and now need to play catch-up. Buying off Hortonworks is a very fast way to do that.

Actually, there is an ever increasing amount of JNI (read: C) code in Hadoop that is in the critical path for security and performance features. Most of that code is not very portable. So either MS is going to pay for some major overhauling of that code, completely new code/branch to replicate that functionality or MS Hadoop is going to be severely lacking in features/performance.

In the case of a Hadoop task failure, the errant monkey was genetically cloned but put into a different environment. So it also served as a nature vs. nurture experiment. :)

Yup, I realize that going to Atom or ARM for a CPU bound process is suicide, but so is only using the tiny amount of money to try and solve the problem. :)

This is absolutely correct and if I had mod points, I'd spend them here.

If your budget is only £4000, you don't have the funding to build a real, actual grid for something that is CPU bound. If you are lucky, you have enough to get one or two boxes and some network gear to put on the top of someone's desk.... at least if you are doing AMD or Intel higher end procs.

Here are two ideas worth exploring...

1) Look at boxes like SeaMicro and other Atom-based mini-grids-in-a-box.
2) Look at building your own with Atom- and Arm- based machines

Yes, but I don't think Yahoo! is adding any more universities to it. In fact, I don't think it ever expanded beyond CMU.

ObDisclosure: I was on the ops-side of that project for Yahoo!.

I wonder if PHP has the same problem we do in Hadoop-land... the lack of enough qualified security people interested enough in a project to actually review code. For example, I'd love for someone with a clue to review Alfredo ( http://cloudera.github.com/alfredo/docs/latest/index.html ) before we build a dependency on it ( https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-7119 ) . But it seems as though getting the right people involved is extremely difficult. :(

Harmony is an effort that was begun and shepherded by Amanda Brock"

To some of us, Harmony is the name of Apache's Java implementation. Sort of surprising that this naming clash wasn't considered given the context. Heck, TFA even mentions Apache HTTPD.

For the record, we actually used ApplixWare prior to StarOffice.

Even if the schedule is "Tuesday-9am: Give trach to Mrs. Lattimer"?