You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to mapreduce-user@hadoop.apache.org by Jeff LI <un...@gmail.com> on 2013/02/14 18:10:52 UTC
Host NameNode, DataNode, JobTracker or TaskTracker on the same machine
Hello,
Is there a good reason that we should not host NameNode, DataNode,
JobTracker or TaskTracker services on the same machine?
Not doing so is suggested here http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/NameNode, but
I'd like to know the reasoning of this.
Thanks
Cheers
Jeff
Re: Host NameNode, DataNode, JobTracker or TaskTracker on the same machine
Posted by Mohammad Tariq <do...@gmail.com>.
With the current configuration you are safe. But as your data grows you
will start consuming more space and eventually you might end with
insufficient space to hold the metadata itself as it is also getting stored
in the same disk. Also, bigger data means more no of files and blocks which
means more no of object which in turn means greater memory consumption. And
don't forget about the resource consumption of your processing layer. Like
disk space required to store the intermediate output files, resources
required to initiate map and reduce tasks etc.
But it all depends upon the size of your data and the intensity of
processing you are going to perform. As of now you look good to me with
128TB+64GB.
HTH
Warm Regards,
Tariq
https://mtariq.jux.com/
cloudfront.blogspot.com
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 11:35 PM, Jeff LI <un...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for your response. I'm running SNN on another machine.
>
> Could you explain a bit more on why I may run out of memory or disk?
>
> I understand that NameNode holds file system metadata in memory. I found
> through this post that (
> http://developer.yahoo.com/blogs/hadoop/posts/2010/05/scalability_of_the_hadoop_dist/
> )
> as a rule of thumb,
> 1 GB metadata ≈ 1 PB physical storage
>
> Currently, my cluster has about 128TB of disk storage in total and 64GB
> memory on each machine. Does this suggests that I'm protected against
> running out of memory from metadata?
>
> Thanks
>
> Cheers
>
> Jeff
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Tariq <do...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> You may run out of memory,out of disk. If SNN is also running on the same
>> machine then you are totally screwed in case of any breakdown
>>
>> shashwat shriparv <dw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >If you are doing it for production all the process should be running on
>> >seperate machine as it will decrease the overload of the machine.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >∞
>> >Shashwat Shriparv
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Jeff LI <un...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hello,
>> >>
>> >> Is there a good reason that we should not host NameNode, DataNode,
>> >> JobTracker or TaskTracker services on the same machine?
>> >>
>> >> Not doing so is suggested here
>> >http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/NameNode,
>> >> but I'd like to know the reasoning of this.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks
>> >>
>> >> Cheers
>> >>
>> >> Jeff
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>> --
>> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>>
>
>
Re: Host NameNode, DataNode, JobTracker or TaskTracker on the same machine
Posted by Mohammad Tariq <do...@gmail.com>.
With the current configuration you are safe. But as your data grows you
will start consuming more space and eventually you might end with
insufficient space to hold the metadata itself as it is also getting stored
in the same disk. Also, bigger data means more no of files and blocks which
means more no of object which in turn means greater memory consumption. And
don't forget about the resource consumption of your processing layer. Like
disk space required to store the intermediate output files, resources
required to initiate map and reduce tasks etc.
But it all depends upon the size of your data and the intensity of
processing you are going to perform. As of now you look good to me with
128TB+64GB.
HTH
Warm Regards,
Tariq
https://mtariq.jux.com/
cloudfront.blogspot.com
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 11:35 PM, Jeff LI <un...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for your response. I'm running SNN on another machine.
>
> Could you explain a bit more on why I may run out of memory or disk?
>
> I understand that NameNode holds file system metadata in memory. I found
> through this post that (
> http://developer.yahoo.com/blogs/hadoop/posts/2010/05/scalability_of_the_hadoop_dist/
> )
> as a rule of thumb,
> 1 GB metadata ≈ 1 PB physical storage
>
> Currently, my cluster has about 128TB of disk storage in total and 64GB
> memory on each machine. Does this suggests that I'm protected against
> running out of memory from metadata?
>
> Thanks
>
> Cheers
>
> Jeff
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Tariq <do...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> You may run out of memory,out of disk. If SNN is also running on the same
>> machine then you are totally screwed in case of any breakdown
>>
>> shashwat shriparv <dw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >If you are doing it for production all the process should be running on
>> >seperate machine as it will decrease the overload of the machine.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >∞
>> >Shashwat Shriparv
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Jeff LI <un...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hello,
>> >>
>> >> Is there a good reason that we should not host NameNode, DataNode,
>> >> JobTracker or TaskTracker services on the same machine?
>> >>
>> >> Not doing so is suggested here
>> >http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/NameNode,
>> >> but I'd like to know the reasoning of this.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks
>> >>
>> >> Cheers
>> >>
>> >> Jeff
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>> --
>> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>>
>
>
Re: Host NameNode, DataNode, JobTracker or TaskTracker on the same machine
Posted by Mohammad Tariq <do...@gmail.com>.
With the current configuration you are safe. But as your data grows you
will start consuming more space and eventually you might end with
insufficient space to hold the metadata itself as it is also getting stored
in the same disk. Also, bigger data means more no of files and blocks which
means more no of object which in turn means greater memory consumption. And
don't forget about the resource consumption of your processing layer. Like
disk space required to store the intermediate output files, resources
required to initiate map and reduce tasks etc.
But it all depends upon the size of your data and the intensity of
processing you are going to perform. As of now you look good to me with
128TB+64GB.
HTH
Warm Regards,
Tariq
https://mtariq.jux.com/
cloudfront.blogspot.com
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 11:35 PM, Jeff LI <un...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for your response. I'm running SNN on another machine.
>
> Could you explain a bit more on why I may run out of memory or disk?
>
> I understand that NameNode holds file system metadata in memory. I found
> through this post that (
> http://developer.yahoo.com/blogs/hadoop/posts/2010/05/scalability_of_the_hadoop_dist/
> )
> as a rule of thumb,
> 1 GB metadata ≈ 1 PB physical storage
>
> Currently, my cluster has about 128TB of disk storage in total and 64GB
> memory on each machine. Does this suggests that I'm protected against
> running out of memory from metadata?
>
> Thanks
>
> Cheers
>
> Jeff
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Tariq <do...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> You may run out of memory,out of disk. If SNN is also running on the same
>> machine then you are totally screwed in case of any breakdown
>>
>> shashwat shriparv <dw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >If you are doing it for production all the process should be running on
>> >seperate machine as it will decrease the overload of the machine.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >∞
>> >Shashwat Shriparv
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Jeff LI <un...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hello,
>> >>
>> >> Is there a good reason that we should not host NameNode, DataNode,
>> >> JobTracker or TaskTracker services on the same machine?
>> >>
>> >> Not doing so is suggested here
>> >http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/NameNode,
>> >> but I'd like to know the reasoning of this.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks
>> >>
>> >> Cheers
>> >>
>> >> Jeff
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>> --
>> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>>
>
>
Re: Host NameNode, DataNode, JobTracker or TaskTracker on the same machine
Posted by Mohammad Tariq <do...@gmail.com>.
With the current configuration you are safe. But as your data grows you
will start consuming more space and eventually you might end with
insufficient space to hold the metadata itself as it is also getting stored
in the same disk. Also, bigger data means more no of files and blocks which
means more no of object which in turn means greater memory consumption. And
don't forget about the resource consumption of your processing layer. Like
disk space required to store the intermediate output files, resources
required to initiate map and reduce tasks etc.
But it all depends upon the size of your data and the intensity of
processing you are going to perform. As of now you look good to me with
128TB+64GB.
HTH
Warm Regards,
Tariq
https://mtariq.jux.com/
cloudfront.blogspot.com
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 11:35 PM, Jeff LI <un...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for your response. I'm running SNN on another machine.
>
> Could you explain a bit more on why I may run out of memory or disk?
>
> I understand that NameNode holds file system metadata in memory. I found
> through this post that (
> http://developer.yahoo.com/blogs/hadoop/posts/2010/05/scalability_of_the_hadoop_dist/
> )
> as a rule of thumb,
> 1 GB metadata ≈ 1 PB physical storage
>
> Currently, my cluster has about 128TB of disk storage in total and 64GB
> memory on each machine. Does this suggests that I'm protected against
> running out of memory from metadata?
>
> Thanks
>
> Cheers
>
> Jeff
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Tariq <do...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> You may run out of memory,out of disk. If SNN is also running on the same
>> machine then you are totally screwed in case of any breakdown
>>
>> shashwat shriparv <dw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >If you are doing it for production all the process should be running on
>> >seperate machine as it will decrease the overload of the machine.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >∞
>> >Shashwat Shriparv
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Jeff LI <un...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hello,
>> >>
>> >> Is there a good reason that we should not host NameNode, DataNode,
>> >> JobTracker or TaskTracker services on the same machine?
>> >>
>> >> Not doing so is suggested here
>> >http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/NameNode,
>> >> but I'd like to know the reasoning of this.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks
>> >>
>> >> Cheers
>> >>
>> >> Jeff
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>> --
>> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>>
>
>
Re: Host NameNode, DataNode, JobTracker or TaskTracker on the same machine
Posted by Jeff LI <un...@gmail.com>.
Thanks for your response. I'm running SNN on another machine.
Could you explain a bit more on why I may run out of memory or disk?
I understand that NameNode holds file system metadata in memory. I found
through this post that (
http://developer.yahoo.com/blogs/hadoop/posts/2010/05/scalability_of_the_hadoop_dist/
)
as a rule of thumb,
1 GB metadata ≈ 1 PB physical storage
Currently, my cluster has about 128TB of disk storage in total and 64GB
memory on each machine. Does this suggests that I'm protected against
running out of memory from metadata?
Thanks
Cheers
Jeff
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Tariq <do...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You may run out of memory,out of disk. If SNN is also running on the same
> machine then you are totally screwed in case of any breakdown
>
> shashwat shriparv <dw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >If you are doing it for production all the process should be running on
> >seperate machine as it will decrease the overload of the machine.
> >
> >
> >
> >∞
> >Shashwat Shriparv
> >
> >
> >
> >On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Jeff LI <un...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> Is there a good reason that we should not host NameNode, DataNode,
> >> JobTracker or TaskTracker services on the same machine?
> >>
> >> Not doing so is suggested here
> >http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/NameNode,
> >> but I'd like to know the reasoning of this.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >>
> >> Jeff
> >>
> >>
>
> --
> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>
Re: Host NameNode, DataNode, JobTracker or TaskTracker on the same machine
Posted by Jeff LI <un...@gmail.com>.
Thanks for your response. I'm running SNN on another machine.
Could you explain a bit more on why I may run out of memory or disk?
I understand that NameNode holds file system metadata in memory. I found
through this post that (
http://developer.yahoo.com/blogs/hadoop/posts/2010/05/scalability_of_the_hadoop_dist/
)
as a rule of thumb,
1 GB metadata ≈ 1 PB physical storage
Currently, my cluster has about 128TB of disk storage in total and 64GB
memory on each machine. Does this suggests that I'm protected against
running out of memory from metadata?
Thanks
Cheers
Jeff
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Tariq <do...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You may run out of memory,out of disk. If SNN is also running on the same
> machine then you are totally screwed in case of any breakdown
>
> shashwat shriparv <dw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >If you are doing it for production all the process should be running on
> >seperate machine as it will decrease the overload of the machine.
> >
> >
> >
> >∞
> >Shashwat Shriparv
> >
> >
> >
> >On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Jeff LI <un...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> Is there a good reason that we should not host NameNode, DataNode,
> >> JobTracker or TaskTracker services on the same machine?
> >>
> >> Not doing so is suggested here
> >http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/NameNode,
> >> but I'd like to know the reasoning of this.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >>
> >> Jeff
> >>
> >>
>
> --
> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>
Re: Host NameNode, DataNode, JobTracker or TaskTracker on the same machine
Posted by Jeff LI <un...@gmail.com>.
Thanks for your response. I'm running SNN on another machine.
Could you explain a bit more on why I may run out of memory or disk?
I understand that NameNode holds file system metadata in memory. I found
through this post that (
http://developer.yahoo.com/blogs/hadoop/posts/2010/05/scalability_of_the_hadoop_dist/
)
as a rule of thumb,
1 GB metadata ≈ 1 PB physical storage
Currently, my cluster has about 128TB of disk storage in total and 64GB
memory on each machine. Does this suggests that I'm protected against
running out of memory from metadata?
Thanks
Cheers
Jeff
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Tariq <do...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You may run out of memory,out of disk. If SNN is also running on the same
> machine then you are totally screwed in case of any breakdown
>
> shashwat shriparv <dw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >If you are doing it for production all the process should be running on
> >seperate machine as it will decrease the overload of the machine.
> >
> >
> >
> >∞
> >Shashwat Shriparv
> >
> >
> >
> >On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Jeff LI <un...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> Is there a good reason that we should not host NameNode, DataNode,
> >> JobTracker or TaskTracker services on the same machine?
> >>
> >> Not doing so is suggested here
> >http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/NameNode,
> >> but I'd like to know the reasoning of this.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >>
> >> Jeff
> >>
> >>
>
> --
> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>
Re: Host NameNode, DataNode, JobTracker or TaskTracker on the same machine
Posted by Jeff LI <un...@gmail.com>.
Thanks for your response. I'm running SNN on another machine.
Could you explain a bit more on why I may run out of memory or disk?
I understand that NameNode holds file system metadata in memory. I found
through this post that (
http://developer.yahoo.com/blogs/hadoop/posts/2010/05/scalability_of_the_hadoop_dist/
)
as a rule of thumb,
1 GB metadata ≈ 1 PB physical storage
Currently, my cluster has about 128TB of disk storage in total and 64GB
memory on each machine. Does this suggests that I'm protected against
running out of memory from metadata?
Thanks
Cheers
Jeff
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Tariq <do...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You may run out of memory,out of disk. If SNN is also running on the same
> machine then you are totally screwed in case of any breakdown
>
> shashwat shriparv <dw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >If you are doing it for production all the process should be running on
> >seperate machine as it will decrease the overload of the machine.
> >
> >
> >
> >∞
> >Shashwat Shriparv
> >
> >
> >
> >On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Jeff LI <un...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> Is there a good reason that we should not host NameNode, DataNode,
> >> JobTracker or TaskTracker services on the same machine?
> >>
> >> Not doing so is suggested here
> >http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/NameNode,
> >> but I'd like to know the reasoning of this.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >>
> >> Jeff
> >>
> >>
>
> --
> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>
Re: Host NameNode, DataNode, JobTracker or TaskTracker on the same machine
Posted by Tariq <do...@gmail.com>.
You may run out of memory,out of disk. If SNN is also running on the same machine then you are totally screwed in case of any breakdown
shashwat shriparv <dw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>If you are doing it for production all the process should be running on
>seperate machine as it will decrease the overload of the machine.
>
>
>
>∞
>Shashwat Shriparv
>
>
>
>On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Jeff LI <un...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Is there a good reason that we should not host NameNode, DataNode,
>> JobTracker or TaskTracker services on the same machine?
>>
>> Not doing so is suggested here
>http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/NameNode,
>> but I'd like to know the reasoning of this.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>>
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Re: Host NameNode, DataNode, JobTracker or TaskTracker on the same machine
Posted by Tariq <do...@gmail.com>.
You may run out of memory,out of disk. If SNN is also running on the same machine then you are totally screwed in case of any breakdown
shashwat shriparv <dw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>If you are doing it for production all the process should be running on
>seperate machine as it will decrease the overload of the machine.
>
>
>
>∞
>Shashwat Shriparv
>
>
>
>On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Jeff LI <un...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Is there a good reason that we should not host NameNode, DataNode,
>> JobTracker or TaskTracker services on the same machine?
>>
>> Not doing so is suggested here
>http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/NameNode,
>> but I'd like to know the reasoning of this.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>>
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Re: Host NameNode, DataNode, JobTracker or TaskTracker on the same machine
Posted by Tariq <do...@gmail.com>.
You may run out of memory,out of disk. If SNN is also running on the same machine then you are totally screwed in case of any breakdown
shashwat shriparv <dw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>If you are doing it for production all the process should be running on
>seperate machine as it will decrease the overload of the machine.
>
>
>
>∞
>Shashwat Shriparv
>
>
>
>On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Jeff LI <un...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Is there a good reason that we should not host NameNode, DataNode,
>> JobTracker or TaskTracker services on the same machine?
>>
>> Not doing so is suggested here
>http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/NameNode,
>> but I'd like to know the reasoning of this.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>>
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Re: Host NameNode, DataNode, JobTracker or TaskTracker on the same machine
Posted by Tariq <do...@gmail.com>.
You may run out of memory,out of disk. If SNN is also running on the same machine then you are totally screwed in case of any breakdown
shashwat shriparv <dw...@gmail.com> wrote:
>If you are doing it for production all the process should be running on
>seperate machine as it will decrease the overload of the machine.
>
>
>
>∞
>Shashwat Shriparv
>
>
>
>On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Jeff LI <un...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Is there a good reason that we should not host NameNode, DataNode,
>> JobTracker or TaskTracker services on the same machine?
>>
>> Not doing so is suggested here
>http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/NameNode,
>> but I'd like to know the reasoning of this.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>>
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Re: Host NameNode, DataNode, JobTracker or TaskTracker on the same machine
Posted by shashwat shriparv <dw...@gmail.com>.
If you are doing it for production all the process should be running on
seperate machine as it will decrease the overload of the machine.
∞
Shashwat Shriparv
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Jeff LI <un...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Is there a good reason that we should not host NameNode, DataNode,
> JobTracker or TaskTracker services on the same machine?
>
> Not doing so is suggested here http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/NameNode,
> but I'd like to know the reasoning of this.
>
> Thanks
>
> Cheers
>
> Jeff
>
>
Re: Host NameNode, DataNode, JobTracker or TaskTracker on the same machine
Posted by shashwat shriparv <dw...@gmail.com>.
If you are doing it for production all the process should be running on
seperate machine as it will decrease the overload of the machine.
∞
Shashwat Shriparv
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Jeff LI <un...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Is there a good reason that we should not host NameNode, DataNode,
> JobTracker or TaskTracker services on the same machine?
>
> Not doing so is suggested here http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/NameNode,
> but I'd like to know the reasoning of this.
>
> Thanks
>
> Cheers
>
> Jeff
>
>
Re: Host NameNode, DataNode, JobTracker or TaskTracker on the same machine
Posted by shashwat shriparv <dw...@gmail.com>.
If you are doing it for production all the process should be running on
seperate machine as it will decrease the overload of the machine.
∞
Shashwat Shriparv
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Jeff LI <un...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Is there a good reason that we should not host NameNode, DataNode,
> JobTracker or TaskTracker services on the same machine?
>
> Not doing so is suggested here http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/NameNode,
> but I'd like to know the reasoning of this.
>
> Thanks
>
> Cheers
>
> Jeff
>
>
Re: Host NameNode, DataNode, JobTracker or TaskTracker on the same machine
Posted by shashwat shriparv <dw...@gmail.com>.
If you are doing it for production all the process should be running on
seperate machine as it will decrease the overload of the machine.
∞
Shashwat Shriparv
On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Jeff LI <un...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Is there a good reason that we should not host NameNode, DataNode,
> JobTracker or TaskTracker services on the same machine?
>
> Not doing so is suggested here http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/NameNode,
> but I'd like to know the reasoning of this.
>
> Thanks
>
> Cheers
>
> Jeff
>
>