[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GIRAPH-28?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13102409#comment-13102409
]
Avery Ching commented on GIRAPH-28:
-----------------------------------
Thank you for providing an interesting set of results. I agree that this
can/will be an issue when there are lots of outgoing edges (common in real
graphs).
The last grouping in your results especially is troubling:
Tiny: 10000 123592
Object: 10000 4290616
Primitive: 10000 4431744
It certainly appears that the edge relationship (dest id and edge value) data
structure makes a big difference. However, I don't understand why the object
and primitive results are similar, nor why using a TreeMap or
org.apache.mahout.math.map.OpenLongFloatHashMap is so much higher overhead than
a pair of primitive arrays.
> Introduce new primitive-specific MutableVertex subclasses
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: GIRAPH-28
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GIRAPH-28
> Project: Giraph
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: graph
> Affects Versions: 0.70.0
> Reporter: Jake Mannix
> Assignee: Jake Mannix
> Attachments: GIRAPH-28.diff
>
>
> As discussed on the list,
> MutableVertex<LongWritable,DoubleWritable,FloatWritable,DoubleWritable> (for
> example) could be highly optimized in its memory footprint if the vertex and
> edge data were held in a form which minimized Java object usage.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
