[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAPREDUCE-1639?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12850632#action_12850632
]
dhruba borthakur commented on MAPREDUCE-1639:
---------------------------------------------
So, then are you saying that thsi is equivalent to just increasing the number of reducers?
And make each reducer receive the records from one bucket.
> Grouping using hashing instead of sorting
> -----------------------------------------
>
> Key: MAPREDUCE-1639
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MAPREDUCE-1639
> Project: Hadoop Map/Reduce
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Reporter: Joydeep Sen Sarma
>
> most applications of map-reduce care about grouping and not sorting. Sorting is a (relatively
expensive) way to achieve grouping. In order to achieve just grouping - one can:
> - replace the sort on the Mappers with a HashTable - and maintain lists of key-values
against each hash-bucket.
> - key-value tuples inside each hash bucket are sorted - before spilling or sending to
Reducer. Anytime this is done - Combiner can be invoked.
> - HashTable is serialized by hash-bucketid. So merges (of either spills or Map Outputs)
works similar to today (at least there's no change in overall compute complexity of merge)
> Of course this hashtable has nothing to do with partitioning. it's just a replacement
for map-side sort.
> --
> this is (pretty much) straight from the MARS project paper: http://www.cse.ust.hk/catalac/papers/mars_pact08.pdf.
They report a 45% speedup in inverted index calculation using hashing instead of sorting (reference
implementation is NOT against Hadoop though).
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
|