mahout-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sean Owen <>
Subject Re: Contract for DataModel methods getUserIDs & getItemIDs
Date Wed, 14 Nov 2012 18:22:29 GMT
Off the top of my head, I can't think of a place that really needs this
behavior. It would come up, likely, in contexts where two models get merged
for some reason and it's doing a merge of ordered lists. I searched some
likely places and did not see this being used this way. My hunch is that
you will get away with it.

On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 6:10 PM, Paulo Villegas <> wrote:

> Hi. The DataModel interface in**model
> specifies in the documentation for the methods getUserIDs & getItemIDs
>   all {user,item} IDs in the model, in order
> My question is: is the "in order" specification a standing requirement?
> I've browsed casually through the source and it seems there is no need
> for the iterator to return IDs in order (the uses I saw just iterate
> through the values apparently with no requirement for them to be
> inorder). But the code base is big, so I may have missed places where it
> is actually needed.
> The reason I ask is that I'm implementing a custom DataModel for our
> purposes, which can be updated on the fly without rebuilding, and the
> need to return the IDs in order is somehow inconvenient, since it
> affects efficiency. If I could get away without ordering, it would be
> much better.
> Thanks
> Paulo
> ______________________________**__
> Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar
> nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico en el enlace
> situado más abajo.
> This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and
> receive email on the basis of the terms set out at:

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message