Well I guess that gives us one reason to keep it in the API. What's the
reasoning? Are there
static data sets which make the most sense to have "initial messages"
serialized with the
graph, instead of generating them at start?
I guess if what you're modeling is in some sense a "2nd order"
equation, then knowing the state of the graph is not enough information to
describe the evolution, you also need the "first derivative" of it's state
(ie the set of
messages it has at any given time).
On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Claudio Martella <
> I actually like the idea of having the messages being inserted at
> vertex load. Currently I'm actually fighting with this functionality
> missing and was going to open and issue sooner or later.
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 6:19 PM, Jake Mannix (Commented) (JIRA)
> <j...@apache.org> wrote:
> > [
> > Jake Mannix commented on GIRAPH-36:
> > -----------------------------------
> > 1) BspUtils.createVertex(Configuration conf, GraphState<I,V,E,M>
> graphState) requires access to the GraphState for instantiation, currently.
> We could avoid it by taking that setGraphState() away from that method and
> leaving it in wherever it gets first used (GraphMapper?), but why not be
> safe, and always set it right after instantiation, so you know that there's
> no other place where someone decides to do BspUtils.createVertex(), but
> forgets to then setGraphState() on it.
> > 2) I really don't know whether it makes sense to be able to instantiate
> "in-flight" messages with vertices. I just wanted to future-proof the API
> a little bit by allowing for the possibility. I'm fine either way.
> >> Ensure that subclassing BasicVertex is possible by user apps
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Key: GIRAPH-36
> >> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GIRAPH-36
> >> Project: Giraph
> >> Issue Type: Improvement
> >> Components: graph
> >> Affects Versions: 0.70.0
> >> Reporter: Jake Mannix
> >> Assignee: Jake Mannix
> >> Priority: Blocker
> >> Fix For: 0.70.0
> >> Attachments: GIRAPH-36.diff
> >> Original assumptions in Giraph were that all users would subclass
> Vertex (which extended MutableVertex extended BasicVertex). Classes which
> wish to have application specific data structures (ie. not a TreeMap<I,
> Edge<I,E>>) may need to extend either MutableVertex or BasicVertex.
> Unfortunately VertexRange extends ArrayList<Vertex>, and there are other
> places where the assumption is that vertex classes are either Vertex, or at
> least MutableVertex.
> >> Let's make sure the internal APIs allow for BasicVertex to be the base
> > --
> > This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
> > If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA
> > For more information on JIRA, see:
> Claudio Martella