[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GIRAPH-28?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13103357#comment-13103357
]
Jake Mannix commented on GIRAPH-28:
-----------------------------------
The alternative to Iterable<Edge<I, E>> is Iterable<I>, returning only the
target vertices, and you can call getEdgeValue(targetVertexId) on any of these
if you need it. Again, many algorithms will simply do something like
for(I targetId : vertex) {
sendMsg(targetId, someFunction(baseMsg, getEdgeValue(targetId));
}
which is maybe a little nicer looking (or at least not uglier) than:
for(Edge<I, E> edge : vertex) {
sendMsg(edge.getVertexId(), someFunction(baseMsg, edge.getValue());
}
And then there are no Edge objects hanging around.
Alternatively, Edge could act just like a typical Writable, and the
Iterator<Edge<I, E>> iterates over the *same* Edge object setting different
values on it as next() is called.
> 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, 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
