-Re: Some proposals for Pig performance optimization
Thejas Nair 2012-06-21, 20:27
bcc'ing the user list.
The comparison against hive order-by is misleading. Hive does not do
total ordering, unless you use a single reducer.
But yes, in case of pig, the sampling phase is unnecessary, if you use a
single reducer. A single reducer can make sense if the data you are
sorting is small. I agree that it makes sense to remove the sampling
phase in pig in such cases.
2. Lazy type conversion
Can you add a note about how many records are there in input vs output ?
In this example, we can improve by using the logical optimizer, so only
necessary parts are typecast before the filter.
One problem in pig is that it uses java objects like Integer, String etc
which are final types. Which means that we can't create a subclass by
that delays the conversion until it actually gets used. The types are
part of the udf interface. We should consider if we want to do something
like this, when we add new udf interfaces.
Some thoughts on serialization/deserialization improvements that i had
written earlier - http://wiki.apache.org/pig/AvoidingSedes
On 6/21/12 11:14 AM, Jie Li wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> I compiled a list of possible optimizaiton for Pig's performance.
> As I haven't been very familiar with the codebase, I'm likely to
> underestimate the complexity involved, so any input will be