hama-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Edward <edw...@udanax.org>
Subject Re: Issues about Partitioning and Record converter
Date Sun, 05 May 2013 23:18:56 GMT
p.s., i think theres mis understand. it doesn't mean that graph will support only sequence
file format. Main is whether converting at patitioning stage or loadVertices stage. 

Sent from my iPhone

On May 6, 2013, at 8:09 AM, Suraj Menon <menonsuraj5@gmail.com> wrote:

> Sure, Please go ahead.
> 
> 
> On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 6:52 PM, Edward J. Yoon <edwardyoon@apache.org>wrote:
> 
>>>> Please let me know before this is changed, I would like to work on a
>>>> separate branch.
>> 
>> I personally, we have to focus on high priority tasks. and more
>> feedbacks and contributions from users. So, if changes made, I'll
>> release periodically. If you want to work on another place, please do.
>> I don't want to wait your patches.
>> 
>> 
>> On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 7:49 AM, Edward J. Yoon <edwardyoon@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>> For preparing integration with NoSQLs, of course, maybe condition
>>> check (whether converted or not) can be used without removing record
>>> converter.
>>> 
>>> We need to discuss everything.
>>> 
>>> On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 7:11 AM, Suraj Menon <surajsmenon@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>>>> I am still -1 if this means our graph module can work only on sequential
>>>> file format.
>>>> Please note that you can set record converter to null and make changes
>> to
>>>> loadVertices for what you desire here.
>>>> 
>>>> If we came to this design, because TextInputFormat is inefficient, would
>>>> this work for Avro or Thrift input format?
>>>> Please let me know before this is changed, I would like to work on a
>>>> separate branch.
>>>> You may proceed as you wish.
>>>> 
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Suraj
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 4:09 PM, Edward J. Yoon <edwardyoon@apache.org
>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> I think 'record converter' should be removed. It's not good idea.
>>>>> Moreover, it's unnecessarily complex. To keep vertex input reader, we
>>>>> can move related classes into common module.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Let's go with my original plan.
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Edward J. Yoon <edwardyoon@apache.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I'm reading our old discussions about record converter, superstep
>>>>>> injection, and common module:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> - http://markmail.org/message/ol32pp2ixfazcxfc
>>>>>> - http://markmail.org/message/xwtmfdrag34g5xc4
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> To clarify goals and objectives:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 1. A parallel input partition is necessary for obtaining scalability
>>>>>> and elasticity of a Bulk Synchronous Parallel processing (It's not
a
>>>>>> memory issue, or Disk/Spilling Queue, or HAMA-644. Please don't
>>>>>> shake).
>>>>>> 2. Input partitioning should be handled at BSP framework level, and
>> it
>>>>>> is for every Hama jobs, not only for Graph jobs.
>>>>>> 3. Unnecessary I/O Overhead need to be avoided, and NoSQLs input
also
>>>>>> should be considered.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The current problem is that every input of graph jobs should be
>>>>>> rewritten on HDFS. If you have a good idea, Please let me know.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
>>>>>> @eddieyoon
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
>>>>> @eddieyoon
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
>>> @eddieyoon
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
>> @eddieyoon
>> 

Mime
View raw message