Personally -- note, personally -- I think that's a whole other project. I
doubt Mahout will ever be anything but Hadoop-based, plus some sequential /
pure Java bits. Or, put another way: that's way too much scope, to span a
third (fourth?) computation model, in a project already sprawling.

I think this is certainly could, should, just be another project. BSP-based
or graph-based ML algorithms. No reason it can't be done by same or similar
people or reuse code, etc. It's a good idea. I don't see a reason such a
thing has to intersect with Mahout directly.

Sean

On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 5:08 PM, Robin Anil <[email protected]> wrote:

> OK. So say mahout moves to using bsp. There are obviously risks you
> mentioned.
>
> if possible we need to be abstracting out the underlying execution. So an
> iterative algorithm should be written using a wrapper library that hides
> giraph, bsp and map reduce. That's something I think will be attractive to
> mahout community, because the risks would no longer be there. We would
> implement any algorithm without betting on the future of any execution
> model. And it will serve as a place where providers of each execution model
> will strive to improve benchmarking against a common platform
>
> Is this something bsp dev would be willing to push?. Because the way I see
> it things are stacked in favour of hadoop map reduce. And a common
> execution library will help bsp push people to go away from map reduce
> without the risk
>
> Robin
> On May 28, 2012 6:41 AM, "Suraj Menon" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > First of all we would like to mention that the ugly side in this
> > thread was totally not intended.
> > From the options you gave, (c) would be a waste of time.
> >
> > The original intention of this thread was to politely check with
> > Mahout community, if it would consider another programming model than
> > Map-Reduce to implement machine learning algorithms. My previous mail
> > was to check if there is any specific feature set (e.g.
> > fault-tolerance, proven scalability, etc.) that is required before
> > Mahout community would consider a new model.
> >
> > But, we do understand now that adoption of a new model could be based
> > on popularity of the system among ML programmers which in turn builds
> > a strong community for that project.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Suraj
> >
> > On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Robin Anil <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > > I am confused, what is the actual ask from the Hama community to Mahout
> > > community?
> > >
> > > Is that
> > > a) Port Mahout algorithms to use BSP?
> > > b) Rewrite Mahout algorithms to use BSP?
> > > c) Argue that Hama is better than Giraph and vice versa?
> > >
> > > Because the response will depend on what the actual question is? This
> > > thread seems to have lost the intended question.
> > >
> > >
> > > ------
> > > Robin Anil
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 4:03 PM, Ted Dunning <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> The key thing to look for is implementation on a platform that is
> widely
> > >> accepted for practical data mining.
> > >>
> > >> We have only recently begun considering Pig as an implementation
> > platform
> > >> after deciding not to use it before.  What has changed is the fairly
> > wide
> > >> adoption of Pig.
> > >>
> > >> On Sat, May 26, 2012 at 11:22 AM, Suraj Menon <[email protected]>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Steering back to relevance, it would be nice to know if there is an
> > >> > expectation on features and benchmarks for any system to be
> considered
> > >> > as a platform to implement machine learning algorithms on Mahout.
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
>

Reply via email to