[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-11583?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14996168#comment-14996168
]
Sean Owen commented on SPARK-11583:
-----------------------------------
Yes, I understand the idea of a 'compressed' bitset being smaller when it's
very sparse. So, this is about compressing the in-memory representation in some
way, whereas roaringbitmap compressed the external representation?
Does this really need a new class? you're just varying an internal
representation of a class.
Are you/we pretty sure this comes up enough to justify, and, is there a runtime
performance hit?
> Make MapStatus use less memory uage
> -----------------------------------
>
> Key: SPARK-11583
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-11583
> Project: Spark
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Kent Yao
>
> In the resolved issue https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-11271, as I
> said, using BitSet can save ≈20% memory usage compared to RoaringBitMap.
> For a spark job contains quite a lot of tasks, 20% seems a drop in the ocean.
> Essentially, BitSet uses long[]. For example a BitSet[200k] = long[3125].
> So if we use a HashSet[Int] to store reduceId (when non-empty blocks are
> dense,use reduceId of empty blocks; when sparse, use non-empty ones).
> For dense cases: if HashSet[Int](numNonEmptyBlocks).size <
> BitSet[totalBlockNum], I use MapStatusTrackingNoEmptyBlocks
> For sparse cases: if HashSet[Int](numEmptyBlocks).size <
> BitSet[totalBlockNum], I use MapStatusTrackingEmptyBlocks
> sparse case, 299/300 are empty
> sc.makeRDD(1 to 30000, 3000).groupBy(x=>x).top(5)
> dense case, no block is empty
> sc.makeRDD(1 to 9000000, 3000).groupBy(x=>x).top(5)
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@spark.apache.org
