Yes, I absolutely agree with you. Perhaps we should arrange a issuing with the mahout to discuss this.
Thanks, Edward. On 3/13/08, Chanwit Kaewkasi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This is really interesting to me that Mahout has the existing > in-memory Matrix package, and Hama codes will expand this for parallel > usage. > > I think we would be trying to unify both interface, or make Hama > MatrixInterface to be conform with Mahout so that the code will be > easier to integrate with it. > > Cheers, > > Chanwit > > > On 13/03/2008, edward yoon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > We should do these things as a below report. > > > > TODO : > > > > * more comments > > * unit tests > > > > ---- > > I've downloaded the Hama package and integrated it into my mahout source > > tree. The code could use some more comments and a pile of unit tests are > > needed to demonstrate its correctness. Other than that, the implementation > > seems complementary with MAHOUT-6 and intended for manipulating very large > > matrices that are stored in Hbase. The two interfaces (Matrix and > > MatrixInterface) are pretty similar and could be coalesced easily to > > provide > > a single abstraction for in-memory and Hbased representations. > > > > If both were in trunk, I'd be willing to work on those tasks. > > > > +1 > > > > Jeff > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "hama-dev" group. > To post to this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/hama-dev?hl=en > -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~--- > > -- B. Regards, Edward yoon @ NHN, corp.
