Re: groupByKey() and keys with many values

you want to discourage people from using > groupByKey. But is there a technical reason why the Iterable is implemented > the way it is? > > Kind regards, > Christoph. > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://apache-spark-developers-list.1001551.n3.nabble.c

Re: groupByKey() and keys with many values

to discourage people from using groupByKey. But is there a technical reason why the Iterable is implemented the way it is? Kind regards, Christoph. -- View this message in context: http://apache-spark-developers-list.1001551.n3.nabble.com/groupByKey-and-keys-with-many-values-tp13985p13992.html

Re: groupByKey() and keys with many values

On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 6:51 AM, Antonio Piccolboni wrote: > As far as the DB writes, remember spark can retry a computation, so your > writes have to be idempotent (see this thread > , in > which Reynold

Re: groupByKey() and keys with many values

mplement something like this with reduceByKey? > > > > Out of curiosity: I understand why you want to discourage people from > using > > groupByKey. But is there a technical reason why the Iterable is > implemented > > the way it is? > > > > Kind regards, >

groupByKey() and keys with many values

. Is it possible to change this behavior without modifying Spark, or is there a plan to change this? Thank you very much for your help! Christoph. -- View this message in context: http://apache-spark-developers-list.1001551.n3.nabble.com/groupByKey-and-keys-with-many-values-tp13985.html Sent from the Apache

Re: groupByKey() and keys with many values

possible to change this behavior without modifying Spark, or is there > a plan to change this? > > Thank you very much for your help! > Christoph. > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://apache-spark-developers-list.1001551.n3.nabble.com/groupByKey-and-keys-w

Re: groupByKey() and keys with many values

erable passed to mapToPair() is backed by a CompactBuffer > > containing all values. > > > > Is it possible to change this behavior without modifying Spark, or is > there > > a plan to change this? > > > > Thank you very much for your help! > > Christoph.