Hey Adrian, To clarify, the replication happens on *write*. So as you write output from the reducer of Job A, you are writing into hdfs. Part of that write path is replicating the data to 2 additional hosts in the cluster (local + 2, this is configured by dfs.replication configuration value). So by the time Job B starts, hadoop has 3 options where each mapper can run and be data-local. Hadoop will do all the work to try to make everything as local as possible.
You'll be able to see from the counters on the job how successful hadoop was at placing your mappers. See the counters "Data-local map tasks" and "Rack-local map tasks". Rack-local being those where hadoop was not able to place the mapper on the same host as the data, but was at least able to keep it within the same rack. All of this is dependent a proper topology configuration, both in your NameNode and JobTracker. On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 3:02 PM, Adrian CAPDEFIER <chivas314...@gmail.com>wrote: > Thanks Bryan. > > Yes, I am using hadoop + hdfs. > > If I understand your point, hadoop tries to start the mapping processes on > nodes where the data is local and if that's not possible, then it is hdfs > that replicates the data to the mapper nodes? > > I expected to have to set up this in the code and I completely ignored > HDFS; I guess it's a case of not seeing the forest from all the trees! > > > > On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 6:38 PM, Bryan Beaudreault < > bbeaudrea...@hubspot.com> wrote: > >> It really comes down to the following: >> >> In Job A set mapred.output.dir to some directory X. >> In Job B set mapred.input.dir to the same directory X. >> >> For Job A, do context.write() as normally, and each reducer will create >> an output file in mapred.output.dir. Then in Job B each of those will >> correspond to a mapper. >> >> Of course you need to make sure your input and output formats, as well as >> input and output keys/values, match up between the two jobs as well. >> >> If you are using HDFS, which it seems you are, the directories specified >> can be HDFS directories. In that case, with a replication factor of 3, >> each of these output files will exist on 3 nodes. Hadoop and HDFS will do >> the work to ensure that the mappers in the second job do as good a job as >> possible to be data or rack-local. >> >> >> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 12:35 PM, Adrian CAPDEFIER < >> chivas314...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Thank you, Chris. I will look at Cascading and Pig, but for starters I'd >>> prefer to keep, if possible, everything as close to the hadoop libraries. >>> >>> I am sure I am overlooking something basic as repartitioning is a fairly >>> common operation in MPP environments. >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Chris Curtin <curtin.ch...@gmail.com>wrote: >>> >>>> If you want to stay in Java look at Cascading. Pig is also helpful. I >>>> think there are other (Spring integration maybe?) but I'm not familiar with >>>> them enough to make a recommendation. >>>> >>>> Note that with Cascading and Pig you don't write 'map reduce' you write >>>> logic and they map it to the various mapper/reducer steps automatically. >>>> >>>> Hope this helps, >>>> >>>> Chris >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 9:36 AM, Adrian CAPDEFIER < >>>> chivas314...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Howdy, >>>>> >>>>> My application requires 2 distinct processing steps (reducers) to be >>>>> performed on the input data. The first operation generates changes the key >>>>> values and, records that had different keys in step 1 can end up having >>>>> the >>>>> same key in step 2. >>>>> >>>>> The heavy lifting of the operation is in step1 and step2 only combines >>>>> records where keys were changed. >>>>> >>>>> In short the overview is: >>>>> Sequential file -> Step 1 -> Step 2 -> Output. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> To implement this in hadoop, it seems that I need to create a separate >>>>> job for each step. >>>>> >>>>> Now I assumed, there would some sort of job management under hadoop to >>>>> link Job 1 and 2, but the only thing I could find was related to job >>>>> scheduling and nothing on how to synchronize the input/output of the >>>>> linked >>>>> jobs. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The only crude solution that I can think of is to use a temporary file >>>>> under HDFS, but even so I'm not sure if this will work. >>>>> >>>>> The overview of the process would be: >>>>> Sequential Input (lines) => Job A[Mapper (key1, value1) => >>>>> ChainReducer (key2, value2)] => Temporary file => Job B[Mapper (key2, >>>>> value2) => Reducer (key2, value 3)] => output. >>>>> >>>>> Is there a better way to pass the output from Job A as input to Job B >>>>> (e.g. using network streams or some built in java classes that don't do >>>>> disk i/o)? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The temporary file solution will work in a single node configuration, >>>>> but I'm not sure about an MPP config. >>>>> >>>>> Let's say Job A runs on nodes 0 and 1 and job B runs on nodes 2 and 3 >>>>> or both jobs run on all 4 nodes - will HDFS be able to redistribute >>>>> automagically the records between nodes or does this need to be coded >>>>> somehow? >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >
