Jake Mannix commented on GIRAPH-83:
bq. How many different memory efficient implementations of Vertex can we expect
I'm getting deja vu from the early days in Mahout, now. "How many specialized
forms of Vector would we possibly need? I mean, Dense and Sparse, right?" And
then the discussion continues along the lines of "well there's vectors which
look like maps (have efficient/fast random access), and also other vectors
which are more compact even, but don't allow easy random access, but have
superfast iterators, then there's vectors which contain only a seed and some
offsetting information which tell you how to generate randomized sparse entries
on the fly algorithmically, ..."
Avoid premature optimization, they say, but never imagine that you've
discovered all of the kinds of crazy optimizations people will come up with for
their particular graph algorithms (for instance, neural nets could want a Dense
vertex, which has connections to *every* vertex of the 'next layer', and so
doesn't even need to keep handles to the target vertex ids, just a big dense
array of edge values, and a target layer identifier).
> Is Vertex correct yet?
> Key: GIRAPH-83
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GIRAPH-83
> Project: Giraph
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Jakob Homan
> I'm seeing a number of people run into oddities with Vertex and am thinking
> we may not have it quite correct yet...
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira