skip to main content
10.1145/3007818.3007819acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesedbConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

A comparative analysis of iterative MapReduce systems

Authors Info & Claims
Published:17 October 2016Publication History

ABSTRACT

Since the development of MapReduce, there have been several efforts to extend data mining and machine learning algorithms for MapReduce. Many of those algorithms are iterative by nature. In order to process them efficiently, Spark as well as research prototypes such as HaLoop, iMapReduce, and Twister are proposed with solutions to iterative computation. In this paper, we thoroughly examine the pros and cons of each system.

References

  1. Y. Bu, B. Howe, M. Balazinska, and M. D. Ernst. HaLoop: Efficient iterative data processing on large clusters. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment, 3(1--2):285∼296, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Y. Zhang, Q. Gao, L. Gao, and C. Wang. iMapreduce: A distributed computing framework for iterative computation. Journal of Grid Computing, 10(1):47∼68, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. J. Ekanayake, H. Li, B. Zhang, T. Gunarathne, S. H. Bae, J. Qiu, and G. Fox. Twister: A runtime for iterative MapReduce. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM International Symposium on High Performance Distributed Computing, pages 810∼818, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. M. Zaharia, M. Chowdhury, M. J. Franklin, S. Shenker, and I. Stoica. Spark: Cluster computing with working sets. In Proceedings of the 2nd USENIX Conference on Hot Topics in Cloud Computing, pages 10, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. T. Condie, N. Conway, P. Alvaro, J. M. Hellerstein, K. Elmeleegy, and R. Sears. MapReduce Online. In Proceedings of the 7th USENIX Conference on Networked Systems Design and Implementation, pages 21, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. E. Elnikety, T. Elsayed, and H. E. Ramadan. iHadoop: Asynchronous iterations for MapReduce. In Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE 3rd International Conference on Cloud Computing Technology and Science, pages 81∼90, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. G. Malewicz, M. H. Austern, A. J. Bik, J. C. Dehnert, I. Horn, N. Leiser, and G. Czajkowski. Pregel: A system for large-scale graph processing. In Proceedings of the 2010 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, pages 135∼146, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    EDB '16: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Emerging Databases: Technologies, Applications, and Theory
    October 2016
    183 pages
    ISBN:9781450347549
    DOI:10.1145/3007818

    Copyright © 2016 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 17 October 2016

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader