incubator-hama-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Edward J. Yoon" <edwardy...@apache.org>
Subject Re: About HAMA-410
Date Fri, 08 Jul 2011 08:51:05 GMT
Hi,

Let's assume that BSPPeer1 send a message to BSPPeer7.

Currently, BSPPeer1 send a message to GroomServerA first, and then
GroomServerA send to GroomServerC. Finally, BSPPeer7 will receive that
message from GroomServerC.

> From the GroomServer source, it seems that BSPPeer and Task perform different roles where
Task takes responsibility of task execution and BSPPeer in communication (sync, send). What's
the benefit of mering two different roles into one?

So again, the communication will be occurred among Invoked (child)
processes directly. BSPPeer1 <-> BSPPeer7.

P.S., The reason why we don't use the multi-threads inside
GroomServer, is related with killing job/task.

> How do a BSPPeer distinguish other peers only related to computation itself involved
in? For instance, each GroomServer has 3 tasks where tasks are divided into 3 groups including
{1,4,7}, {2,5,8} and {3,6,9}. How do they communicate e.g without falsely sync with different
peers?

There's no change. BSPPeer knows all peer names, and barrier will be
managed by ZK.

On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 4:22 PM, ChiaHung Lin <chl501@nuk.edu.tw> wrote:
> This looks ok from the perspective of executing function. In addition, I have a few questions
and would like to gain more ideas on how it may work after refactored.
>
> From the GroomServer source, it seems that BSPPeer and Task perform different roles where
Task takes responsibility of task execution and BSPPeer in communication (sync, send). What's
the benefit of mering two different roles into one?
>
> How do a BSPPeer distinguish other peers only related to computation itself involved
in? For instance, each GroomServer has 3 tasks where tasks are divided into 3 groups including
{1,4,7}, {2,5,8} and {3,6,9}. How do they communicate e.g without falsely sync with different
peers?
>
> GroomServerA    GroomServerB    GroomServerC
> BSPPeer1        BSPPeer4        BSPPeer7
> BSPPeer2        BSPPeer5        BSPPeer8
> BSPPeer3        BSPPeer6        BSPPeer9
>
> -----Original message-----
> From:Edward J. Yoon <edwardyoon@apache.org>
> To:hama-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Date:Thu, 7 Jul 2011 19:48:48 +0900
> Subject:About HAMA-410
>
> Hi,
>
> To support multi-tasks, I'm thinking about merging BSPPeer and Task.
> Then, communication will be occurred among Tasks directly. I think,
> there's no need to manage BSPPeers inside GroomServer.
>
> Can we think about the latent side-effects from this decision, together?
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
> @eddieyoon
>
>
> --
> ChiaHung Lin
> Department of Information Management
> National University of Kaohsiung
> Taiwan
>



-- 
Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
@eddieyoon

Mime
View raw message