Hi, Interesting results! With changes of HAMA-946 [1], the final comparation is:
Hama (160.696 seconds) and Giraph (158 seconds), right? Thanks! 1 - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HAMA-946 2015-04-09 10:13 GMT-03:00 Edward J. Yoon <[email protected]>: > Just FYI, I tested giraph using same input data on 2 node cluster. > Tests are not enough yet but Hama is slightly slow. > > The main reason is that hama's graph job consists of two multi > jobs:graph pre-partitioning and computing (I/O usage between jobs and > launching overheads). > > If possible, I'll fix this issue before release 0.7. :) > > Thanks. > > -- > Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon >
