Couple of ideas: * take a look at compression in 1.X http://www.datastax.com/dev/blog/whats-new-in-cassandra-1-0-compression * is there repetition in the binary data ? Can you save space by implementing content addressable storage ? Cheers
----------------- Aaron Morton Freelance Developer @aaronmorton http://www.thelastpickle.com On 20/04/2012, at 12:55 AM, Dave Brosius wrote: > I think your math is 'relatively' correct. It would seem to me you should > focus on how you can reduce the amount of storage you are using per item, if > at all possible, if that node count is prohibitive. > > On 04/19/2012 07:12 AM, Franc Carter wrote: >> >> >> Hi, >> >> One of the projects I am working on is going to need to store about 200TB of >> data - generally in manageable binary chunks. However, after doing some >> rough calculations based on rules of thumb I have seen for how much storage >> should be on each node I'm worried. >> >> 200TB with RF=3 is 600TB = 600,000GB >> Which is 1000 nodes at 600GB per node >> >> I'm hoping I've missed something as 1000 nodes is not viable for us. >> >> cheers >> >> -- >> Franc Carter | Systems architect | Sirca Ltd >> franc.car...@sirca.org.au | www.sirca.org.au >> Tel: +61 2 9236 9118 >> Level 9, 80 Clarence St, Sydney NSW 2000 >> PO Box H58, Australia Square, Sydney NSW 1215 >> >
