> Oh, we are going to delete the previous aggregators entirely? Yes. Using registerAggregator(), one or two more aggregators can be used. We don't need to keep hard-coded old aggregator.
On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 11:21 PM, Anastasis Andronidis <[email protected]> wrote: > Oh, we are going to delete the previous aggregators entirely? I thought we > are keeping the old way and also add the new aggregators on top. > > On 6 Ιαν 2014, at 3:05 μ.μ., Edward J. Yoon <[email protected]> wrote: > >> We don't need to think about it if we introduce new aggregators >> interface - HAMA-838 - and get rid of hard-coded aggregator in >> GraphJobRunner. The getAggregatedValue() just returns the aggregated >> values from S - 1. >> >> As I mentioned before, Giraph provides two types of aggregator >> behaviour; regular (reset for every step) and persistent. We should >> think about it. >> >> On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 10:40 PM, Anastasis Andronidis >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> I want to make it straight about this issue. When a vertex is calling >>> voteToHalt() do we aggregated at the same superstep? >>> >>> The current behavior is: >>> >>> superstep1: >>> vertex -> voteToHalt >>> Is aggregated just right after. >>> >>> superstep2: >>> vertex -> is halted from previous superstep >>> Is not aggregated. >>> >>> Do we want to aggregate everything no mater if they are halted? Do we want >>> to stop aggregation right after halting? Or it is ok as it is? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Anastasis >> >> >> >> -- >> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon >> @eddieyoon >> > -- Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon @eddieyoon
