Small correction: the number of iterations not the number of vertices.
Am 22.10.2012 15:58 schrieb "Thomas Jungblut" <[email protected]>:

> As far as I recall you can use the connected components (mindist search)
> example to calculate the largest components.
> The number of connected vertices is then usually the diameter of the graph.
>
> 2012/10/22 Francisco Sanches <[email protected]>
>
>> Hi Tomas,
>>
>> The big problem is this. I need to perform calculations with all vertices.
>> The graph package provides me the perspective of only one node. And I need
>> to all nodes in the graph. I have an implementation using mapreduce
>> developed a colleague, and he uses breadth for all nodes. I need to
>> because
>> we all want to calculate the radius and diameter of the graph using exact
>> calculations.
>>
>>
>>
>> 2012/10/22 Francisco Sanches <[email protected]>
>>
>> > Thanks for the reply
>> >
>> > Sorry for my bad english, I'm a Brazilian student. I need informations,
>> > suggestions, research material.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > 2012/10/22 Apurv Verma <[email protected]>
>> >
>> >> Hello Francisco,
>> >>  Do you mean you want to offer some tips or you are asking for some?
>> For
>> >> the latter case you can see my
>> >>
>> >>
>> http://code.google.com/p/anahad/source/browse/trunk/src/main/java/org/anahata/bsp/WordCount.java
>> >>
>> >> This is crude and at the moment not scalable but you'll get the crux of
>> >> it.
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Regards,
>> >> Apurv Verma
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 7:07 PM, Francisco Sanches
>> >> <[email protected]>wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Colleagues,
>> >> >
>> >> > Would you like tips, information on how to turn a hadoop
>> implementation
>> >> of
>> >> > a program in an implementation of the same program in hama bsp. For I
>> >> have
>> >> > implemented a program that works centrality in large graphs
>> implemented
>> >> in
>> >> > hadoop and would like to pass it to hama.
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > Francisco Sanches
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Francisco Sanches
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Francisco Sanches
>>
>
>

Reply via email to