It seems to me the question has not been answered :
"is it possible yes or no to force a smaller split size
than a block on the mappers"
Not that I know (but you could implement something to do it) but why would
you do it?
By default if the split is set under the size of a block, it will be a
One of the reason is data-locality. The second is that a block is written
into a single hard-drive (leaving replicas aside) so if n mappers were
reading n parts from the same block well they would share the hard-drive
bandwidth... So it is not a clear win.
You can change the block size of the file you want to read but using
smaller block size is really an anti-pattern. Most people increase the
(Note : block size of files are fixed when writing the files and it can be
different between two different files.)
Are you trying to handle data which are too small?
If hive supports multi-threading for mapper it might be an solution. But I
don't the configuration for that.
PS : the question is quite general and not really hive related
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 8:46 AM, Edward Capriolo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Not all files are split-table Sequence Files are. Raw gzip files are not.
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 1:47 AM, Nitin Pawar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>> set mapred.min.split.size=1024000;
>> set mapred.max.split.size=4096000;
>> set hive.merge.mapfiles=false;
>> I had set above value and setting max split size to a lower value did
>> increase my # number of maps. My blocksize was 128MB
>> Only thing was my files on hdfs were not heavily compressed and I was
>> using RCFileFormat
>> I would suggest if you have heavily compressed files then you may want to
>> do check what will be size after uncompression and allocate more memory to
>> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 11:46 AM, David Morel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I have seen many posts on various sites and MLs, but didn't find a firm
>>> answer anywhere: is it possible yes or no to force a smaller split size
>>> than a block on the mappers, from the client side? I'm not after
>>> pointers to the docs (unless you're very very sure :-) but after
>>> real-life experience along the lines of 'yes, it works this way, I've
>>> done it like this...'
>>> All the parameters that I could find (especially specifying a max input
>>> split size) seem to have no effect, and the files that I have are so
>>> heavily compressed that they completely saturate the mappers' memory
>>> when processed.
>>> A solution I could imagine for this specific issue is reducing the block
>>> size, but for now I simply went with disabling in-file compression for
>>> those. And changing the block size on a per-file basis is something I'd
>>> like to avoid if at all possible.
>>> All the hive settings that we tried only got me as far as raising the
>>> number of mappers from 5 to 6 (yay!) where I would have needed at least
>>> ten times more.
>> Nitin Pawar