3 ms·
This is pretty misleading: a lot of the presented open source equivalents are nothing like the original. For example, comparing HDFS to Colossus is... optimisti
by smueller1234 8y ago
This is pretty misleading: a lot of the presented open source equivalents are nothing like the original. For example, comparing HDFS to Colossus is... optimistic? Having used / worked on/with both, the similarity is roughly that they both store bytes.
This would be a lot less misleading if there were annotations and if the "open source/real world" didn't mix together other large companies' products with open source. For example protobuf is open source, but this makes it look like it isn't.
- puzzle 8y agoYeah, HDFS is a toy in comparison. It's barely comparable to the original GFS, which was retired... Almost a decade ago?
- alexhutcheson 8y agoIf you needed something Colossus-like in the open source world, what would you use? Is there anything available that's better than HDFS for the "general-purpose, big, distributed file system" use-case?
- puzzle 8y agoCeph?
- q3k 8y agoCeph. Although it's slightly upside down with it's block / objects semantics (and as such, you don't exactly get the namespaced append-only semantics of Colossus), and doesn't depend on an excellent separate BigTable-like and Chubby-like layer underneath, instead rolling their own.