I'd be interested to see where this leads to. It could end up as a sort of
Commons Parallel library. Besides providing an execution API, there could
be plenty of support utilities that tend to be found in all the
*Util(s)/*Helper classes in projects like all the ones I mentioned earlier
(basically all sorts of Hadoop-related projects and other distributed
systems here).

Really, there's so many ways that such a project could head, I'd like to
hear more ideas on what to focus on.

On 12 June 2017 at 18:19, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote:

> The upshot is that there has to be a way to do this with some custom code
> to at least have the ability to 'fast path' the code without reflection.
> Using lambdas should make this fairly syntactically unobtrusive.
>
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 4:02 PM, Arun Mohan <strider90a...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Yes, reflection is not very performant but I don't think I have any other
> > choice since the library has to inspect the object supplied by the client
> > at runtime to pick out the methods to be invoked using CompletableFuture.
> > But the performance penalty paid for using reflection will be more than
> > offset by the savings of parallel method execution, more so as the no of
> > methods executed in parallel increases.
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 3:21 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On a lower-level, if you want to use this for lower-level services
> (where
> > > there is no network latency for example), you will need to avoid using
> > > reflection to get the best performance.
> > >
> > > Gary
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 3:15 PM, Arun Mohan <strider90a...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Gary,
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for your response. You have some valid and interesting points
> > :-)
> > > > Of course you are right that Spark is much more mature. Thanks for
> your
> > > > insight.
> > > > It will be interesting indeed to find out if the core parallelization
> > > > engine of Spark can be isolated like you suggest.
> > > >
> > > > I started working on this project because I felt that there was no
> good
> > > > library for parallelizing method calls which can be plugged in easily
> > > into
> > > > an existing java project. Ultimately, if such a solution can be
> > > > incorporated in the Apache Commons, it would be a useful addition to
> > the
> > > > Commons repository.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Arun
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 3:01 PM, Gary Gregory <
> garydgreg...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Arun,
> > > > >
> > > > > Sure, and that is to be expected, Spark is more mature than a four
> > > class
> > > > > prototype. What I am trying to get to is that in order for the
> > library
> > > to
> > > > > be useful, you will end up with more in a first release, and after
> a
> > > > couple
> > > > > more releases, there will be more and more. Would Spark not have in
> > its
> > > > > guts the same kind of code your are proposing here? By extension,
> > will
> > > > you
> > > > > not end up with more framework-like (Spark-like) code and solutions
> > as
> > > > > found in Spark? I am just playing devil's advocate here ;-)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > What would be interesting would be to find out if there is a core
> > part
> > > of
> > > > > Spark that is separable and ex tractable into a Commons component.
> > > Since
> > > > > Spark has a proven track record, it is more likely, that such a
> > library
> > > > > would be generally useful than one created from scratch that does
> not
> > > > > integrate with anything else. Again, please do not take any of this
> > > > > personally, I am just playing here :-)
> > > > >
> > > > > Gary
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 2:29 PM, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I already see a huge difference here: Spark requires a bunch of
> > > > > > infrastructure to be set up, while this library is just a
> library.
> > > > > Similar
> > > > > > to Kafka Streams versus Spark Streaming or Flink or Storm or
> Samza
> > or
> > > > the
> > > > > > others.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 12 June 2017 at 16:28, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 2:26 PM, Arun Mohan <
> > > strider90a...@gmail.com
> > > > >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Good afternoon.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I have been working on a java generic parallel execution
> > library
> > > > > which
> > > > > > > will
> > > > > > > > allow clients to execute methods in parallel irrespective of
> > the
> > > > > number
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > method arguments, type of method arguments, return type of
> the
> > > > method
> > > > > > > etc.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Here is the link to the source code:
> > > > > > > > https://github.com/striderarun/parallel-execution-engine
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The project is in a nascent state and I am the only
> contributor
> > > so
> > > > > > far. I
> > > > > > > > am new to the Apache community and I would like to bring this
> > > > project
> > > > > > > into
> > > > > > > > Apache and improve, expand and build a developer community
> > around
> > > > it.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I think this project can be a sub project of Apache Commons
> > since
> > > > it
> > > > > > > > provides generic components for parallelizing any kind of
> > > methods.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Can somebody please guide me or suggest what other options I
> > can
> > > > > > explore
> > > > > > > ?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi Arun,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thank you for your proposal.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > How would this be different from Apache Spark?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thank you,
> > > > > > > Gary
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > Arun
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>



-- 
Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>

Reply via email to