uima-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From james.d.ba...@gmail.com
Subject Re: Reordering Analysis Engines
Date Mon, 27 Feb 2017 16:50:17 GMT
Thanks Richard,

I don’t think we’re using any multi-threading bits at the moment, so it sounds like the
SimplePipeline might be ok for the time being. If we do decide to move to a multi-threaded
system in the future, presumably implementing our own is the best way forwards, or is there
an alternative to CPE/SimplePipeline that I’ve missed?


> On 27 Feb 2017, at 16:35, Richard Eckart de Castilho <rec@apache.org> wrote:
> On 27.02.2017, at 16:39, James Baker <james.d.baker@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Thanks Richard, switching over to SimplePipeline did the trick. I'll update
>> the GitHub repository with a working solution for reference.
>> Is there any information available on the advantages/disadvantages of
>> SimplePipeline over using the CPE? The application I'm using already uses
>> CPE, so I'd like to understand what the impact of moving away from that
>> might be.
> SimplePipeline is just a basic single-threaded thing. What it does internally
> is basically creating an aggregate from all the engines that it receives,
> creating a CAS, and using that CAS to loop over the collection reader and
> all the engines. All no extra threads created, no parallelization.
> CpePipeline and CpeBuilder make use of the rather deprecated UIMA CPE [1].
> They are very simple wrappers around CPE mimicking the API of SimplePipeline.
> CpePipeline configures CPE to scale up the analysis engines creating one
> parallel instance per CPU core (reserving one core for your other work).
> With CpeBuilder, you have a bit more control over the settings, e.g. you 
> can change the number of threads to use and you can post-process the
> CpeDescription if you want that.
> Cheers,
> -- Richard
> [1] https://uima.apache.org/d/uimaj-2.9.0/references.html#ugr.ref.xml.cpe_descriptor

View raw message