Skip to main content

Are Big Data appliances worth the buck

While setting up the Big Data technical environment, one of the questions which most enterprise grapple with is whether to go for an appliance or a cluster. A Big Data appliance can be defined as an integrated system which provides a combination of hardware, software, storage and network device for enabling big data use cases. A Big Data cluster on the other hand can be defined as a combination of exclusive nodes with required hardware, big data processing software, coupled storage and can be integrated together via network devices.

While appliances are usually known to involve a large payout to the vendor, comparative studies have tried to prove that the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) may in certain cases be less or equal to a cluster setup.  Let’s take a look at whether the appliances are worth the money spent.
Appliance
Cluster
- Higher initial payout - Lower initial payout – with a chance to acquire new resources as you scale out
- Standard configuration across nodes - Provision to mix and match configurations based on distinct need for name node or data nodes
- High probability of vendor lock in - More liberty in terms of switching vendors and associated software and components
- Field tested Hadoop and ecosystem projects version offered as package - Need to make difficult component choices and version compatibility tests
-Lower set up time and enablement -Higher setup time and labor effort
- Eliminates learning curve for administrators on each component -Need high comfort level and education on required components
- Could have issues in installing add on software - Flexibility in terms of installing additional software
- New hardware investment - Offers possibility of leveraging existing hardware
- Need to read the fine line in contract on software upgrade and pricing - Better control on software upgrade and pricing
- Additional scaling capabilities could lead to technical and pricing challenges - More flexibility on additional scaling capability
- Will need to stick to SQL standard offered by vendor - Can choose your own preferred SQL on Hadoop solution
- Lesser hard work required for restoration of node with common support subscription - Could involve following and coordination among multiple vendors for trouble-shooting
- May involve migration costs - May not involve any major migration cost since you could add up additional nodes on the cluster

Recommended steps to arrive at decision:
  1. Collect use cases, associated data volume and growth projections
  2. Determine the Hadoop/Big data ecosystem layers that you will invest in next 3 years.
  3. Analyze software, hardware components being offered vis-à-vis requirements as listed out in steps 1 and 2 above
  4. Perform benchmark tests (if required skills are available)
  5. Compare metrics across appliances of different vendors and cluster machines with varied configuration
  6. Arrive at qualitative and quantitative comparison across the options to help you choose a winner.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Low latency SQL querying on HBase

HBase has emerged as one of the most popular NoSQL database offering distributed, versioned, non-relational tables hosted on commodity hardware. However, with a large set of users coming from a relational SQL world, it made sense to bring the SQL back in this NoSQL. With Apache Phoenix, database professionals get a convenient way to query HBase through SQL in a fast and efficient manner. Continuing our discussion with James Taylor, the founder of Apache Phoenix, we focus on the functional aspects of Phoenix in this second part of interaction.
Although Apache Phoenix started off with distinct low latency advantage, have the other options like Hive/Impala (integrated with HBase) caught up in terms of performance?
No, these other tools such as Hive and Impala have not invested in improving performance against HBase data, so if anything, Phoenix's advantage has only gotten bigger as our performance improves.  See this link for comparison of Apache Phoenix with Apache Hive and Cloudera Im…

Data deduplication tactics with HDFS and MapReduce

As the amount of data continues to grow exponentially, there has been increased focus on stored data reduction methods. Data compression, single instance store and data deduplication are among the common techniques employed for stored data reduction.
Deduplication often refers to elimination of redundant subfiles (also known as chunks, blocks, or extents). Unlike compression, data is not changed and eliminates storage capacity for identical data. Data deduplication offers significant advantage in terms of reduction in storage, network bandwidth and promises increased scalability.
From a simplistic use case perspective, we can see application in removing duplicates in Call Detail Record (CDR) for a Telecom carrier. Similarly, we may apply the technique to optimize on network traffic carrying the same data packets.
Some of the common methods for data deduplication in storage architecture include hashing, binary comparison and delta differencing. In this post, we focus on how MapReduce and…

Pricing models for Hadoop products

A look at the various pricing models adopted by the vendors in the Hadoop ecosystem. While the pricing models are evolving in this rapid and dynamic market, listed below are some of the major variations utilized by companies in the sphere.
1) Per Node:Among the most common model, the node based pricing mechanism utilizes customized rules for determining pricing per node. This may be as straight forward as pricing per name node and data node or could have complex variants of pricing based on number of core processors utilized by the nodes in the cluster or per user license in case of applications.
2) Per TB:The data based pricing mechanism charges customer for license cost per TB of data. This model usually accounts non replicated data for computation of cost.
3) Subscription Support cost only:In this model, the vendor prefers to give away software for free but charges the customer for subscription support on a specified number of nodes. The support timings and level of support further …