I'm running version 0.6.1.
Looking at the results I found through testing,
public void aggregateVertex(M lastValue, Vertex<V, E, M> v)
doesn't seem to be the problem. Both 'aggregate(v, v.getValue())' and
'aggregate(v, lastValue, v.getValue())'
are called correctly and work on the same values.
However, when finalizing through 'finalizeAggregation()' in the
'public void doMasterAggregation(MapWritable updatedCnt)' method,
the value aggregated upon by 'aggregate(v, lastValue, v.getValue())'
is lost. That is what happens at me.
Could it be that I'm implementing the aggregate methods incorrect?
In the end however, I can not find a direct bug in TRUNK[1], although
it is not clear to me what/which part of the code was changed through
the ticket on JIRA.
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 2:41 AM, Edward J. Yoon <edwardyoon@apache.org>wrote:
> I found the ticket on JIRA 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HAMA659
>
> And it seems already fixed.
>
> What is your version of hama here? and can you find some bug in TRUNK[1]?
>
> 1.
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/hama/trunk/graph/src/main/java/org/apache/hama/graph/AggregationRunner.java
>
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 9:41 PM, Steven van Beelen <smcvbeelen@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Could anyone tell me if I'm correct concerning the possible problem I
> > posted and replied on in the previous two emails?
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 5:08 PM, Steven van Beelen <smcvbeelen@gmail.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Additionally, I found this in the mail archives:
> >>
> >>
> http://mailarchives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hamauser/201210.mbox/%3CCAJ=ys=W8F5W4aduV+=+yfsvh41xSa22wNqQRKapadZD+QBag@mail.gmail.com%3E
> >> This actually exactly covers my point. Is this still considered as a
> bug,
> >> calling two different aggregate functions in a row?
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Steven van Beelen <
> smcvbeelen@gmail.com>wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi Thomas,
> >>>
> >>> Then I guess I did not explain myself clearly.
> >>> What you describe is indeed how I think of the AverageAggregator to
> work,
> >>> but if I use the AverageAggregator in my own PageRank implementation it
> >>> does not return
> >>> the average of all absolute differences but just the average of the sum
> >>> of all values.
> >>>
> >>> The (very) small example graph I use has only five vertices, were the
> sum
> >>> of every vertice it's value is always 1.0.
> >>> When I use the AverageAggregator it will always return 0.2 when calling
> >>> the getLastAggregatedValue method.
> >>> It shouldn't do that right?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 1:18 PM, Thomas Jungblut <
> >>> thomas.jungblut@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi Steven,
> >>>>
> >>>> the AverageAggregator is used to determine the average of all absolute
> >>>> differences between old pagerank and new pagerank for every vertex.
> >>>> This is documented like it should behave in the javadoc of the given
> >>>> classes and suffices to track if pagerank values have yet converged
or
> >>>> not.
> >>>>
> >>>> What you describe is a perfectly valid way to track the pagerank
> >>>> difference
> >>>> throughout all supersteps. But this is not how (imho) the
> >>>> AverageAggregator
> >>>> should behave, so you have to write your own.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> 2013/4/17 Steven van Beelen <smcvbeelen@gmail.com>
> >>>>
> >>>> > The values in my case are the DoubleWritable values each vertice
has
> >>>> and
> >>>> > the aggregators aggregate on.
> >>>> > My tests showed that, when the aggregator was set to
> >>>> AverageAggregator, the
> >>>> > average of all the vertice values from the past compute step were
> >>>> returned.
> >>>> > Actually, AverageAggregator should return the average difference
of
> >>>> all the
> >>>> > oldnew value pairs of every vertice instead of the mean.
> >>>> > The average difference is then used to check whether convergence
is
> >>>> > reached, which is relevant for all task ofcourse.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Hence, the convergence point, for which the Aggregator is used,
will
> >>>> not be
> >>>> > reached.
> >>>> > This thus makes it so that the algorithm will just run the maximum
> >>>> number
> >>>> > of iterations set (30 iterations on the PageRank example) in every
> >>>> case.
> >>>> > I experienced the same with my own PageRank implementation.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > I think it has something to do with the finalizeAggregation step
> taken.
> >>>> > Next to that, both the 'aggregate(VERTEX vertex, M value)' and
> >>>> > 'aggregate(VERTEX vertex, M oldValue, M newValue)' methods are
> called
> >>>> every
> >>>> > time, were one would think only the second (with old/new values)
> would
> >>>> > suffice.
> >>>> > Because of this, the global variable 'absoluteDifference' in the
> >>>> > 'AbsDiffAggregator' class is overwriten/overruled by the first
> >>>> aggregate.
> >>>> > Additionally, if one would make its own Aggregation class in the
> same
> >>>> > fashion as AbsDiffAggregator and AverageAggregator, but leave out
> the
> >>>> > 'aggregate(VERTEX vertex, M value)', my output turned out to be
> 0.0000
> >>>> > every time.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > I hope I made myself clear.
> >>>> > Regards
> >>>> >
> >>>> >
> >>>> > On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Edward J. Yoon <
> >>>> edwardyoon@apache.org
> >>>> > >wrote:
> >>>> >
> >>>> > > Thanks for your report.
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > > What's the meaning of 'all the values'? Please give me more
> details
> >>>> > > about your problem.
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > > I didn't look at 'dangling links & aggregators' part of
PageRank
> >>>> > > example closely, but I think there's no bug. Aggregators is
just
> used
> >>>> > > for global communication. For example, finding max value[1]
can be
> >>>> > > done in only one iteration using MaxValueAggregator.
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > > 1.
> >>>> http://cdn.dejanseo.com.au/wpcontent/uploads/2011/06/supersteps.png
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > > On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Steven van Beelen <
> >>>> smcvbeelen@gmail.com
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > > wrote:
> >>>> > > > Hello,
> >>>> > > >
> >>>> > > > I'm creating my own pagerank in hama for a testing and
I think I
> >>>> found
> >>>> > a
> >>>> > > > problem with the AverageAggregator. I'm not sure if it
is me or
> >>>> the the
> >>>> > > > AverageAggregator class in general, but I believe it
just
> returns
> >>>> the
> >>>> > > mean
> >>>> > > > of all the values instead of the average difference between
the
> >>>> old and
> >>>> > > new
> >>>> > > > value as intended.
> >>>> > > >
> >>>> > > > For testing, I created my own AbsDiffAggregator and
> >>>> AverageAggregator
> >>>> > > > classes, using FloatWritable instead of DoubleWritables.
The
> same
> >>>> > problem
> >>>> > > > still occured: I got a mean of all the values in the
graph
> instead
> >>>> of
> >>>> > an
> >>>> > > > average difference.
> >>>> > > >
> >>>> > > > Could someone tell me if I'm doing something wrong or
what I
> should
> >>>> > > provide
> >>>> > > > to better explain my problem?
> >>>> > > >
> >>>> > > > Regards,
> >>>> > > > Steven van Beelen, Vrije Universiteit of Amsterdam
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > > 
> >>>> > > Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
> >>>> > > @eddieyoon
> >>>> > >
> >>>> >
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
>
>
>
> 
> Best Regards, Edward J. Yoon
> @eddieyoon
>
