On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 2:12 AM, Olivier Grisel wrote:
> 2009/12/3 Ted Dunning :
>> Very interesting results, particularly the lack of dependence on data size.
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 12:02 AM, David Hall wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 2:35 AM, Isabel Drost wrote:
>>> > On Fri Grant I
I'm not planing to make new changes to 'mapred', my new code should go
to 'mapreduce'
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 3:34 PM, Isabel Drost wrote:
> On Thu Sean Owen wrote:
>
>> I suggest our current stance be that we use 0.20.x, with the old APIs.
>> When 0.21 comes out and stabilizes, we move. So I sug
Oh is that what that is! I'll try it.
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 3:18 PM, Isabel Drost wrote:
> On Thu Sean Owen wrote:
>
>> Anyone know if there is an easy way to package a build target with all
>> its dependencies with Maven? I can't find the formula with the
>> assembly plugin but guess it is the
Am I missing something, or can't you just specify jar-with-dependencies in
the assembly plugin configuration in the pom?
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 10:18 AM, Isabel Drost wrote:
> On Thu Sean Owen wrote:
>
> > Anyone know if there is an easy way to package a build target with all
> > its dependenci
On Thu Sean Owen wrote:
> Anyone know if there is an easy way to package a build target with all
> its dependencies with Maven? I can't find the formula with the
> assembly plugin but guess it is there.
Hmm, judging from the poms in our repo, we are currently doing that
through an ant-script. Ju
Anyone know if there is an easy way to package a build target with all
its dependencies with Maven? I can't find the formula with the
assembly plugin but guess it is there.
We will need stuff like this to build mapreduce-ready .jars.
On Thu Sean Owen wrote:
> I suggest our current stance be that we use 0.20.x, with the old APIs.
> When 0.21 comes out and stabilizes, we move. So I suggest keeping
> these and deleting 'mapred' at that point.
Sounds good to me.
Isabel
I suggest our current stance be that we use 0.20.x, with the old APIs.
When 0.21 comes out and stabilizes, we move. So I suggest keeping
these and deleting 'mapred' at that point.
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 2:03 PM, Isabel Drost wrote:
> On Sun deneche abdelhakim wrote:
>
>> df/mapred works with the
On Sun deneche abdelhakim wrote:
> df/mapred works with the old hadoop API
> df/mapreduce works with hadoop 0.20 API
Hmm. Maybe it would still be possible to factor that code out that is
common to both implementations? That step might make migrating to a
future Hadoop version easier as well as o
2009/12/3 Ted Dunning :
> Very interesting results, particularly the lack of dependence on data size.
>
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 12:02 AM, David Hall wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 2:35 AM, Isabel Drost wrote:
>> > On Fri Grant Ingersoll wrote:
>> >> On Nov 19, 2009, at 1:15 PM, Sean Owen w
Very interesting results, particularly the lack of dependence on data size.
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 12:02 AM, David Hall wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 2:35 AM, Isabel Drost wrote:
> > On Fri Grant Ingersoll wrote:
> >> On Nov 19, 2009, at 1:15 PM, Sean Owen wrote:
> >> > Post a patch if you'
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 2:35 AM, Isabel Drost wrote:
> On Fri Grant Ingersoll wrote:
>> On Nov 19, 2009, at 1:15 PM, Sean Owen wrote:
>> > Post a patch if you'd like to proceed, IMHO.
>> +1
>
> +1 from me as well. I would love to see solid svm support in Mahout.
And another +1 from me. If you wa
12 matches
Mail list logo
