I saw this bug has been fixed in 0.90. but I still think it can be improved. can i just attach a new patch under the same issue?
thanks, Feng On 11/8/06, Feng Jiang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thanks. I have attached the patch: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ManageAttachments.jspa?id=12354993 Best regards, Feng On 11/8/06, Doug Cutting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Feng Jiang wrote: > > I think what I am concerning is different with the request485. I mean, > > if the input of Reduce phase is : > > > > K2, V3 > > K2, V2 > > K1, V5 > > K1, V3 > > K1, V4 > > > > in the current hadoop, the reduce output could be: > > K1, (V5, V3, V4) > > K2, (V3, V2) > > > > But I hope hadoop supports job.setOutputValueComparatorClass > (theClass), > > so that i can make values are in order, and the output could be: > > K1, (V3, V4, V5) > > K2, (V2, V3) > > Yes, that is different. One can currently achieve what you're after by > including values in keys. The only real difference between keys and > values is that values are not used for sorting, and some optimizations > are made because of that. But if you need to sort by value as well as > key, then you can use compound key that includes both, and a null value. > Note that with block compression, repeated keys should not use too > much space. Does that suffice? > > Another related issue is http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-475 > . > > > but I have written the GenericWritable, which is a abstract class to > > help user wrap different Writable instances with only one byte cost. > The > > GenericObject is a demo showing how to use GenericWritable. Both of > them > > are attached within this email. > > The attachment did not make it. Can you please attach these to a Jira > issue, as a patch file? > > http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-hadoop/HowToContribute > > Thanks! > > Doug >
