You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@flink.apache.org by Attila Bernáth <be...@gmail.com> on 2014/10/15 17:09:30 UTC
VertexUpdateFunction class has memory between the supersteps
Dear All,
I am using the spargel API. I found that the VertexUpdateFunction
class has memory between the supersteps. Is it safe to rely on this
memory?
Attila
Re: VertexUpdateFunction class has memory between the supersteps
Posted by Attila Bernáth <be...@gmail.com>.
So I thought I can use this fact to remember something about these nodes.
2014-10-16 11:25 GMT+02:00 Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org>:
> Yes, that is guaranteed.
>
> Am 16.10.2014 10:23 schrieb "Attila Bernáth" <be...@gmail.com>:
>
>> For example: an instance of the vertexupdatefunction processes certain
>> vertices in one superstep (in its updateVertex method). Can I assume
>> that it will process the same vertices in the next superstep, too?
>>
>> Attila
>>
>> 2014-10-16 1:34 GMT+02:00 Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org>:
>> > Hi!
>> >
>> > I am not sure that I understand the question. What memory between
>> > supersteps
>> > are you referring to?
>> >
>> > If you mean that the same instances of the functions are used across all
>> > supersteps and that their variables are kept: yes, you can rely on that.
>> >
>> > Stephan
>> >
>> > Am 15.10.2014 17:09 schrieb "Attila Bernáth" <be...@gmail.com>:
>> >
>> >> Dear All,
>> >>
>> >> I am using the spargel API. I found that the VertexUpdateFunction
>> >> class has memory between the supersteps. Is it safe to rely on this
>> >> memory?
>> >>
>> >> Attila
Re: VertexUpdateFunction class has memory between the supersteps
Posted by Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org>.
Yes, that is guaranteed.
Am 16.10.2014 10:23 schrieb "Attila Bernáth" <be...@gmail.com>:
> For example: an instance of the vertexupdatefunction processes certain
> vertices in one superstep (in its updateVertex method). Can I assume
> that it will process the same vertices in the next superstep, too?
>
> Attila
>
> 2014-10-16 1:34 GMT+02:00 Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org>:
> > Hi!
> >
> > I am not sure that I understand the question. What memory between
> supersteps
> > are you referring to?
> >
> > If you mean that the same instances of the functions are used across all
> > supersteps and that their variables are kept: yes, you can rely on that.
> >
> > Stephan
> >
> > Am 15.10.2014 17:09 schrieb "Attila Bernáth" <be...@gmail.com>:
> >
> >> Dear All,
> >>
> >> I am using the spargel API. I found that the VertexUpdateFunction
> >> class has memory between the supersteps. Is it safe to rely on this
> >> memory?
> >>
> >> Attila
>
Re: VertexUpdateFunction class has memory between the supersteps
Posted by Attila Bernáth <be...@gmail.com>.
For example: an instance of the vertexupdatefunction processes certain
vertices in one superstep (in its updateVertex method). Can I assume
that it will process the same vertices in the next superstep, too?
Attila
2014-10-16 1:34 GMT+02:00 Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org>:
> Hi!
>
> I am not sure that I understand the question. What memory between supersteps
> are you referring to?
>
> If you mean that the same instances of the functions are used across all
> supersteps and that their variables are kept: yes, you can rely on that.
>
> Stephan
>
> Am 15.10.2014 17:09 schrieb "Attila Bernáth" <be...@gmail.com>:
>
>> Dear All,
>>
>> I am using the spargel API. I found that the VertexUpdateFunction
>> class has memory between the supersteps. Is it safe to rely on this
>> memory?
>>
>> Attila
Re: VertexUpdateFunction class has memory between the supersteps
Posted by Stephan Ewen <se...@apache.org>.
Hi!
I am not sure that I understand the question. What memory between
supersteps are you referring to?
If you mean that the same instances of the functions are used across all
supersteps and that their variables are kept: yes, you can rely on that.
Stephan
Am 15.10.2014 17:09 schrieb "Attila Bernáth" <be...@gmail.com>:
> Dear All,
>
> I am using the spargel API. I found that the VertexUpdateFunction
> class has memory between the supersteps. Is it safe to rely on this
> memory?
>
> Attila
>