Live data from Hacker News

Command-line Tools can be 235x Faster than your Hadoop Cluster (2014)

adamdrake.com

61–70 of 169 posts

Re: Command-line Tools can be 235x Faster than your Hadoop Cluster (2014)

#61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of articles I read about snowflake involves data vault which is a massive turn off. And when their tech lead (Kent Graziano) is a prominent figure in the DV bullshit...

What is DV?

It's a data modelling method for data warehouses, it can be used in Snowflake or on any other data management platform.

Re: Command-line Tools can be 235x Faster than your Hadoop Cluster (2014)

#62
post #23
post #2

This should be tagged (2014). This article has made the rounds many times. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu... Outside of legacy systems, Hadoop isn't widely used anymore.

Maybe we need a reminder every now and then that text-files are quite capable and except from being faster to parse in a lot of situation has the benefits of being "future safe" and easy to backup and compress as well.

The common text file for lots of this, CSVs, are absolutely awful. They're fine until they totally aren't, they were just the best option for a lot of use cases. I'd argue that's now been entirely replaced with parquet, significantly faster and broad support, proper types and more.

Re: Command-line Tools can be 235x Faster than your Hadoop Cluster (2014)

#63
post #36

There is no point running something like Hadoop or Spark or Flink if your problem is not bottlenecked by the resources of of a single machine. E.g. how would this solution work if the data is so large or the problem requires more context (looking at more than one line at the time) and therefore more memory? Answer: it wouldn't .

That's it, for a long time, what a lot of companies that jumped on the big data bandwagon didn't realize is that they didn't actually have big data.

I'm sure there's some arbitrary lines that can be drawn, but anything under 1 TB is not big data anymore and can be processed on a single machine.

Other things to consider is data volume though. A popular use case of hadoop was to take e.g. server access logs - high volume data that traditionally you wouldn't hold onto for long - and get something meaningful out of that.

Re: Command-line Tools can be 235x Faster than your Hadoop Cluster (2014)

#64
post #14

I went to a Hadoop workshop in 2016 where the speaker was insistent Hadoop would replace traditional relational databases in the next 5 years. It’s been six and I think the death of relational databases has still been greatly exaggerated. https://twitter.com/donatj/status/740210538320273408

Things look to be quite cyclic; ten years ago, NoSQL was pushed as The Future, but these days companies still build their core data on top of a traditional relational database. I don't even know which NoSQL is even popular. It feels like it's been pushed to the fringes, e.g. key/value stores, or the Q in a CQRS setup where it acts more as a readonly cache.

Re: Command-line Tools can be 235x Faster than your Hadoop Cluster (2014)

#65
post #7
post #5

Walking to the store is faster than catching a plane

But if you're going to keep adding destinations and going to them, an airport is a better idea.

Depends if it's just another store within walking distance. I think the gist of the GP comment was that they use a big tool for a small job. Many small jobs don't make the big tool any more useful.

Re: Command-line Tools can be 235x Faster than your Hadoop Cluster (2014)

#66
post #62
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe we need a reminder every now and then that text-files are quite capable and except from being faster to parse in a lot of situation has the benefits of being "future safe" and easy to backup and compress as well.

The common text file for lots of this, CSVs, are absolutely awful. They're fine until they totally aren't, they were just the best option for a lot of use cases. I'd argue that's now been entirely replaced with parquet, significantly faster and broad support, proper types and more.

I’d argue that for as long as Excel doesn’t support Parquet files, we haven’t seen the last of CSVs for a long time.

Parquet is great, but it’s simply nowhere near as ubiquitous as CSV.

Re: Command-line Tools can be 235x Faster than your Hadoop Cluster (2014)

#67
post #58
post #2

This should be tagged (2014). This article has made the rounds many times. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu... Outside of legacy systems, Hadoop isn't widely used anymore.

What about if you had 500 petabytes of data to analyze? Big data does exist in the wild.

> What about if you had 500 petabytes of data to analyze?

Then we probably need the big tools.

> Big data does exist in the wild.

So does little data.

The problem is that a "one-size-fits-all" approach has become common, not just in data analysis; think of all the low-medium traffic webpages that use giant, complex frameworks and huge distributed systems just to display essentially a small CRUD app that would have been ALOT easier to cobble together in plain JS on a simple LAMP server.

What the article shows is the importance on deciding for the right tool for the job: When I want to plant a little tree in my backyard, bringing one of these https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/01/Bucket_w... to dig the hole is proooobably overengineering it a tiny little bit, and will likely take longer than getting a shovel.

Re: Command-line Tools can be 235x Faster than your Hadoop Cluster (2014)

#68

If you don't have to do any complex sorting or grouping, yes a simple script works way better. It doesn't have the overhead of using the scheduler, or distributing the data into chunks on many servers. Also consider using sqlite, postgres, or your EDW if you have one. Tools like CSVkit and XSV are useful for preprocessing, exploration. I've seen many ETL scripts written where a simple SQL statement would have been be…

> I've seen many ETL scripts written where a simple SQL statement would have been better. SQL queries tend to work after a few queries have been verified to be correct, ETL jobs in languages like java can dump mysterious stack traces referencing many frameworks breaking due to data issues, memory issues, or unhandled cases.

This is so true. I write data pipelines at work. I only use SQL to move data around for this very reason. You never get any bug to fix with SQL. You sometimes need to adjust some queries to some new bad input but never ever will you see : 'index out of bound' or 'wrong argument' or whatever.

Re: Command-line Tools can be 235x Faster than your Hadoop Cluster (2014)

#69
post #2

This should be tagged (2014). This article has made the rounds many times. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu... Outside of legacy systems, Hadoop isn't widely used anymore.

So what is used instead of Hadoop currently?

Re: Command-line Tools can be 235x Faster than your Hadoop Cluster (2014)

#70
post #7
post #5

Walking to the store is faster than catching a plane

But if you're going to keep adding destinations and going to them, an airport is a better idea.

might depend on the distance between destinations
Post reply on HN