[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-5888?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15878779#comment-15878779
]
Gabor Gevay commented on FLINK-5888:
------------------------------------
Just a wild guess: Is it possible that the shuffle actually ended up between
the two maps, and it is somehow not visible on the graph? I'm thinking this
because I don't see how would the annotation make the shuffle disappear (but
it's possible that I'm misunderstanding something).
> ForwardedFields annotation is not generating optimised execution plan in
> example KMeans job
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: FLINK-5888
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-5888
> Project: Flink
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: DataSet API, Examples, Java API
> Affects Versions: 1.1.3
> Reporter: Ziyad Muhammed Mohiyudheen
>
> Flink KMeans java example [1] shows the usage of ForwardedFields function
> annotation. How ever, the example job was taking more time than expected on
> medium sized data itself. By merely removing the function annotation from the
> example code (with out any other change), a better execution plan and run
> time was obtained. The execution plan shows that no combiner is used and the
> two Map tasks are not chained when ForwardedFields is enabled. The experiment
> is documented in [2]
> [1]
> https://github.com/apache/flink/blob/master/flink-examples/flink-examples-batch/src/main/java/org/apache/flink/examples/java/clustering/KMeans.java
> [2] https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B0IlZv0uHBuvVEZ5ZmNpN19jVVU
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
