Re: Efficiency for Filter then Transform ( filter().map() vs flatMap() )

We will definitely also try to get the chaining overhead down a bit. BTW: To reach this kind of throughput, you need sources that can produce very fast... On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 12:20 AM, Welly Tambunan wrote: > Hi Stephan, > > That's good information to know. We will hit

Re: Efficiency for Filter then Transform ( filter().map() vs flatMap() )

Hi Stephan, Cheers On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 2:31 PM, Stephan Ewen wrote: > We will definitely also try to get the chaining overhead down a bit. > > BTW: To reach this kind of throughput, you need sources that can produce > very fast... > > On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 12:20 AM, Welly

Re: Efficiency for Filter then Transform ( filter().map() vs flatMap() )

Hi Stephan, Thanks for your clarification. Basically we will have lots of sensor that will push this kind of data to queuing system ( currently we are using RabbitMQ, but will soon move to Kafka). We also will use the same pipeline to process the historical data. I also want to minimize the

Re: Efficiency for Filter then Transform ( filter().map() vs flatMap() )

In a set of benchmarks a while back, we found that the chaining mechanism has some overhead right now, because of its abstraction. The abstraction creates iterators for each element and makes it hard for the JIT to specialize on the operators in the chain. For purely local chains at full speed,

Re: Efficiency for Filter then Transform ( filter().map() vs flatMap() )

Hi Stephan, That's good information to know. We will hit that throughput easily. Our computation graph has lot of chaining like this right now. I think it's safe to minimize the chain right now. Thanks a lot for this Stephan. Cheers On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 7:20 PM, Stephan Ewen

Efficiency for Filter then Transform ( filter().map() vs flatMap() )

Hi All, I would like to filter some item from the event stream. I think there are two ways doing this. Using the regular pipeline filter(...).map(...). We can also use flatMap for doing both in the same operator. Any performance improvement if we are using flatMap ? As that will be done in one

Re: Efficiency for Filter then Transform ( filter().map() vs flatMap() )

Hey Welly, If you call filter and map one after the other like you mentioned, these operators will be chained and executed as if they were running in the same operator. The only small performance overhead comes from the fact that the output of the filter will be copied before passing it as input