Re:MapR may shut down as investor pulls out after ‘extremely...
by mbreese on Thursday May 30, 2019 @08:03PM
(#20057125)
I remember being in a pitch meeting with MapR a few years ago. It was for a large academic institution’s HPC group. We were all very interested in their NFS/HDFS tools, which would have met a very critical need. They just kept talking about the Hadoop workflows, which wouldn’t have flown at all for this group. Most HPC workflows/tools don’t map very well to Hadoop or at the minimum would have required tools to have been rewritten.
We really wanted to spend the money, but as far as I remember, we didn’t end up doing anything more than a test install.
I’d still love a middle option that could handle petabyte scale storage without the Isilon price tag.
Re:MapR may shut down as investor pulls out after ‘extremely...
by hc91 on Friday May 31, 2019 @06:00AM
(#20059549)
CERN?
Re:MapR may shut down as investor pulls out after ‘extremely...
by mbreese on Friday May 31, 2019 @09:45AM
(#20060774)
No, this was at Stanford a few years ago, so not close to CERN level HPC.
Our lab has modest compute requirements, but need a ton of storage, so we were very interested in a mid-range storage option.
Re:MapR may shut down as investor pulls out after ‘extremely...
by noir-york on Thursday May 30, 2019 @06:14PM
(#20056485)
Thanks for taking the time! Its fascinating learning about this in an area (storage) I know nothing about.
Re:MapR may shut down as investor pulls out after ‘extremely...
by vkoepnick on Friday May 31, 2019 @08:51PM
(#20066378)
The sweet spot you describe sounds like Quobyte to me.
Re:MapR may shut down as investor pulls out after ‘extremely...
by notacoward on Sunday June 02, 2019 @11:40PM
(#20080250)
...except for the "proven solution" part, Quobyte marketing VP.
Re:MapR may shut down as investor pulls out after ‘extremely...
by vkoepnick on Wednesday June 05, 2019 @01:36PM
(#20106968)
Honest question - what constitutes "proven"?
Re:MapR may shut down as investor pulls out after ‘extremely...
by notyourday on Monday June 10, 2019 @12:35PM
(#20148267)
Someone else that I know of a similar scale has used it successfully and is happy with it.
Fundamentally, file system clusters are a very difficult business to get into and make enough money to justify being in that business. On a low end there's open source stuff that kind of sort of works. Selling consulting on a top of it is at best a ramen-profitable business. No one is buying a Ceph-consulting for a million dollars if they run a business that needs that size of storage -- the data is too valuable to do a semi-custom solution and be a test case for Ceph, Gluster, etc.
On the top end there are EMCs of the world with $350K/node pricing + yearly 10% support contract. Finally, there's a "rewrite the app" alternative ( call it 1 year, million $ price tag to move to object store ) that a customer company is always considering.
So the sweet spot is enterprise solution with a license cost of about $12k-$24k per year per node which has EMC/Isilon/NetApp-like functionality that unbundles software from hardware. The tricky part is that it needs to be a proven solution that works on the comparable EMC/Isilon/NetApp sized deployments. To do that one needs to have a lot of excellent engineers that cost a lot of money, a lot of sales engineers that intrinsically understand the commonality between the customers' requirements and can explain it to those engineers and a lot of very expensive test beds.