Thank you, Claudio. Regarding the last point: I am mutating the graph in superstep N, and in N+1 I am logging the total number of vertices and halt all nodes. When I am doing it like this, I don't get the updated number of vertices. However, if I wait one more superstep, I get the correct number. Strange..
Cheers, Christian 2013/6/26 Claudio Martella <claudio.marte...@gmail.com> > Hi, > > inline are my (tentative) answers. > > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 6:34 PM, Christian Krause <m...@ckrause.org> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> if I create new vertices, will they be executed in the next superstep? >> And does it make a difference whether I create them using >> addVertexRequest() or sendMessage()? >> > > The vertex will be active. The case of a sendMessage is intuitive, because > a message wakens up a vertex. > > >> >> Another question: if I mutate the graph in superstep X and X is the last >> superstep, will the changes be executed? It is not clear to me whether the >> graph changes are executed during or before the next superstep. >> > > I'm actually not sure about our internal implementation, somebody can > shade light on this, but I'd expect it to be running due to above (presence > of active vertices). > > >> >> And related to the last question, if I mutate the graph in superstep X, >> and I call getTotalNumVertices() in the next step, can I expect the updated >> number of vertices, or the number of vertices before the mutation? >> > > The mutatiations are applied at the end of a superstep and are visibile in > the following one. Hence in s+1 you'd see the new number of vertices. > > >> >> Sorry for these very basic questions, but I did not find any >> documentation on these details. If this is documented somewhere, it would >> be helpful to get a link. >> >> Cheers, >> Christian >> > > > > -- > Claudio Martella > claudio.marte...@gmail.com >
