When Google first introduced the Map/Reduce paradigm in 2004, no comparable system had been available to the general public. The situation has changed since then. The Map/Reduce paradigm has become increasingly popular and there is no shortage of Map/Reduce implementations in today's computing world. The predominant solution is currently Apache Hadoop, started by Yahoo. Besides employing custom Map/Reduce installations, customers of cloud services can now exploit ready-made made installations (e.g. the Elastic Map/Reduce System). In the mean time, other, second generation frameworks have started to appear. They either fine tune the Map/Reduce model for specific scenarios, or change the paradigm altogether, such as Google's Pregel. In this paper, we present a comparison between these second generation frameworks and the current de-facto standard Hadoop, by focusing on a specific scenario: large-scale graph analysis. We analyze the different means of fine-tuning those systems by exploiting their unique features. We base our analysis on the k-core decomposition problem, whose goal is to compute the centrality of each node in a given graph; we tested our implementation in a cluster of Amazon EC2 nodes with realistic datasets made publicly available by the SNAP project.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Elser et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: