Oh, Sure no problem. ;)
On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 6:59 PM, realstolz.gmail <[email protected]> wrote: > hi, Edward > > Thank for your reply~ > > Sorry for my confusing expression. > My real question is > 1. Is it safe to concurrently send messages by multiple threads using the > same peer in one superstep (before calling sync()) > 2. Is it safe to concurrently receive messages by multiple threads using the > same peer in one superstep (after calling sync()) > > not the interleave between send and receive operation, they are independent > questions. > > //In fact, I want use multithread in one peer process, but I'm not sure > whether the current message manager is concurrently sate > > > thanks, > -Rong > > On Jan 7, 2013, at 5:45 PM, "Edward J. Yoon" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Nope, BSP tasks are synchronized by exchanging messages at barrier >> synchronization step. It means that you should call sync() method >> between send and getCurrentMessage(). >> >>> (BTW: I think the default setting for distributed version of message >>> manager is HadoopMessageManagerImpl. Is it right?) >> >> Yes. >> >> On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 6:01 PM, realstolz.gmail <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I would like to know whether the message manager used by hama (distributed >>> version) >>> supports concurrently send and receive messages? >>> Is it safe to concurrently call peer.send() and peer.getCurrentMessage() by >>> multiple threads >>> in distributed version? >>> >>> (BTW: I think the default setting for distributed version of message >>> manager is HadoopMessageManagerImpl. Is it right?) >>> >>> thanks, >>> -Rong >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon >> @eddieyoon > -- Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon @eddieyoon
