hadoop-common-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mahadev konar (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (HADOOP-910) Reduces can do merges for the on-disk map output files in parallel with their copying
Date Wed, 05 Mar 2008 19:31:41 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-910?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12575468#action_12575468
] 

Mahadev konar commented on HADOOP-910:
--------------------------------------

i read through the description and comments. Amar can you explain with what parameter changes
would this patch show performace enhancements? meaning for what "practical" parameters would
this patch help the performance?  I need that to do some performance measuremetnts. Thanks.

> Reduces can do merges for the on-disk map output files in parallel with their copying
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HADOOP-910
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-910
>             Project: Hadoop Core
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: mapred
>            Reporter: Devaraj Das
>            Assignee: Amar Kamat
>             Fix For: 0.17.0
>
>         Attachments: HADOOP-910-review.patch, HADOOP-910.patch, HADOOP-910.patch, HADOOP-910.patch
>
>
> Proposal to extend the parallel in-memory-merge/copying, that is being done as part of
HADOOP-830, to the on-disk files.
> Today, the Reduces dump the map output files to disk and the final merge happens only
after all the map outputs have been collected. It might make sense to parallelize this part.
That is, whenever a Reduce has collected io.sort.factor number of segments on disk, it initiates
a merge of those and creates one big segment. If the rate of copying is faster than the merge,
we can probably have multiple threads doing parallel merges of independent sets of io.sort.factor
number of segments. If the rate of copying is not as fast as merge, we stand to gain a lot
- at the end of copying of all the map outputs, we will be left with a small number of segments
for the final merge (which hopefully will feed the reduce directly (via the RawKeyValueIterator)
without having to hit the disk for writing additional output segments).
> If the disk bandwidth is higher than the network bandwidth, we have a good story, I guess,
to do such a thing.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


Mime
View raw message