hadoop-common-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Doug Cutting <cutt...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Help with MapReduce
Date Thu, 25 May 2006 16:24:45 GMT
Dennis Kubes wrote:
> The problem is that I have a single url.  I get the inlinks to that url 
> and then I need to go access content from all of its inlink urls that 
> have been fetched.
> I was doing this through Random access.  But then I went back and 
> re-read the google MapReduce paper and saw that it was designed for 
> Sequential access and saw that Hadoop implements the same way.  But so 
> far I haven't found a way to efficiently solve this kind of problem in 
> sequential format.

If your input urls are only a small fraction of the collection, then 
random access might be appropriate, or you might instead use two (or 
more) MapReduce passes, something like:

1. url -> inlink urls (using previously inverted link db)
2. inlink urls -> inlink content

In each case the mapping might look like it's doing random access, but, 
if input keys are sorted, and the "table" you're "selecting" from (the 
link db in the first case and the content in the second) are sorted, 
then the accesses will actually be sequential, scanning each table only 
once.  But these will generally be remote DFS accesses.  MapReduce can 
usually arrange to place tasks on a node where the input data is local, 
but when the map task then accesses other files this optimization cannot 
be made.

In Nutch, things are slightly more complicated, since the content is 
organized by segment, each sorted by URL.  So you could either add 
another MapReduce pass so that the inlink urls are sorted by segment 
then url, or you could append all of your segments into a single segment.

But if you're performing the calculation over the entire collection, or 
even a substantial fraction, then you might be able to use a single 
MapReduce pass, with the content and link db as inputs, performing your 
required computations in reduce.  For anything larger than a small 
fraction of your collection this will likely be fastest.

> If I were to do it in the configure and close wouldn't that still open a 
> single reader per map call?

configure() and close() are only called once per map task.


View raw message