News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on ClusterHQ is shutting down. Parent comment

Re:ClusterHQ is shutting down by chrissnell on Thursday December 22, 2016 @05:38PM (#13241025)
Let me clarify: not performant in any way that we want to implement. The NetApp referenced in that analysis would cost as much as we've spent on both of our OpenStack and Kube clusters. NetApp is great if you're a hospital or a bank but not an internet company.

We need something built on common PC chassis, either as distributed local storage or some type of high speed interconnect.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:ClusterHQ is shutting down by otterley on Thursday December 22, 2016 @06:52PM (#13241579)
Storage is definitely one of those businesses where "fast, good, cheap: pick any two" has always applied, and still does.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:ClusterHQ is shutting down by rickycook on Thursday December 22, 2016 @09:12PM (#13242256)
and as an industry, we are tending towards fast, cheap, and you can write code to work around not having "good"
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:ClusterHQ is shutting down by bottled_poe on Thursday December 22, 2016 @10:34PM (#13242617)
In my experience, if it isn't good relatively quickly, it certainly doesn't remain cheap for long.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:ClusterHQ is shutting down by user5994461 on Thursday December 22, 2016 @10:45PM (#13242677)
It's not so much about the code as having a usage that can accommodate being run on "not good".

Banks and hospitals don't.

[ Parent | on HN ]