Thanks for replying. Clustering algorithms do work with 0.19  and in this
coming release we are including a hadoop based solution for vectorizing
document. Hope you will like it

Robin


On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Andrew Wang <[email protected]>wrote:

> Hi, Robin
>
> In my work, i have a lot of query log which produced by search engine and
> we
> use hadoop as our tool to analyse those data. Sometimes, i'd like to some
> data mining job such as clustering the similary queries, or classify them.
> At first time, i think the mahout maybe another option for me to do data
> mining job (as you know, the weka is my favorable data mining tool). But,
> as
> i try to integrate mahout into my project, i find two major obstacles to
> prevent me moving on further:
>
> First, in my company, The hadoop with 0.19 is provided as platform for us
> to
> do daily jobs. As we know, Mahout is dependent the hadoop with 0.2 or
> above.
> This prevent me from benefiting from the functions which provided by
> mahout.
>
> Secondly, the input data should be indexed by Lucene firstly( right or
> wrong? ), then be imported by the Mahout. It confuse me very much, because
> there are so many data stored by HDFS. In order to use the Mahout, i have
> to
> check out all the data firstly ,and indexed by Lucene, and so on. It is
> unbelievable for me.
>
> So, i haven't use the mahout in my daily work. However, i always give my
> attendtion to the Mahout, maybe someday i benefit from it.
>
> What about other one's idea?
>
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 6:19 PM, Robin Anil <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Hi Mahouters
> >      I am trying to find out how you are using Mahout for your work or
> > project, or which among the algorithms in Mahout are more important for
> you
> > to do that work. And finally what do you expect to see in Mahout(A kind
> of
> > a
> > wish list). It wont take much of your time. Please reply with this
> details.
> >  It will help a great deal in figuring out where what we need to
> > prioritize.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Robin
> >
>
>
>
> --
> http://anqiang1900.blog.163.com/
>

Reply via email to