Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-giraph-dev-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-giraph-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EBDC2D1BD for ; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 17:15:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 51589 invoked by uid 500); 1 Aug 2012 17:15:03 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-giraph-dev-archive@giraph.apache.org Received: (qmail 51458 invoked by uid 500); 1 Aug 2012 17:15:03 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@giraph.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@giraph.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@giraph.apache.org Received: (qmail 51450 invoked by uid 500); 1 Aug 2012 17:15:03 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-giraph-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 51447 invoked by uid 99); 1 Aug 2012 17:15:03 -0000 Received: from issues-vm.apache.org (HELO issues-vm) (140.211.11.160) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 01 Aug 2012 17:15:03 +0000 Received: from isssues-vm.apache.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by issues-vm (Postfix) with ESMTP id 638B91404B4 for ; Wed, 1 Aug 2012 17:15:03 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 1 Aug 2012 17:15:03 +0000 (UTC) From: "Alessandro Presta (JIRA)" To: giraph-dev@incubator.apache.org Message-ID: <133323011.1445.1343841303412.JavaMail.jiratomcat@issues-vm> In-Reply-To: <1538412782.59599.1342464515472.JavaMail.jiratomcat@issues-vm> Subject: [jira] [Commented] (GIRAPH-259) TestBspBasic.testBspPageRank is broken MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GIRAPH-259?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13426758#comment-13426758 ] Alessandro Presta commented on GIRAPH-259: ------------------------------------------ I understand your concern, and this makes perfect sense. In the model I outlined, at superstep S, MasterCompute works on the results of vertex computations at superstep S-1. At superstep S+1, the vertices see the result of MasterCompute's work, which in turn was based on the vertices' work at superstep S-1. So it can be useful to know when MasterCompute is being executed. However, maybe aggregators are not a great means of "communication": if the aggregate operation is already defined by the user, what is left to MasterCompute besides reading them and optionally halting the computation? Would it be clearer to have a concept of graph-wide variables, which are set by MasterCompute and read-only for vertices? This seems more appropriate for things like the "phase" you mentioned. Just a few thoughts, but I think Maja raised a sensible issue. > TestBspBasic.testBspPageRank is broken > -------------------------------------- > > Key: GIRAPH-259 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GIRAPH-259 > Project: Giraph > Issue Type: Bug > Reporter: Maja Kabiljo > Assignee: Maja Kabiljo > Attachments: GIRAPH-259-1.patch, GIRAPH-259-2.patch, GIRAPH-259-3.patch > > > Test crashes on line 152 in class SimplePageRankVertex in distributed mode. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira