Let's say I want to generate 100 trillion pieces of data (random numbers to keep it simple), and I'd like to use Google Dataflow to do it.
I can think of a dumb way to do this (I'm not 100% sure this would work, but this is where I'd start trying): take a text file that's 10 million lines long, and for every line in the input text file have a DoFn that loops for 10 million iterations, outputting a randomly generated number each iteration that are all eventually outputted to a text file. (whatever is in the original text file would just be ignored).
But I can't help but think there might be a better, less-hacky way to generate data using Dataflow. Any suggestions on a better way to do this?
Thank you!
For small dataset, you can just use pipeline.apply(Create.of(...)) to generate, but it won't scale (the generation code will be executed locally).
A better way may be:
List<Integer> l = ...; // 100k integers inside
pipeline.apply(Create.of(l)).apply(ParDo.of(new Generate100MDoFn())).apply(TextIO.Write.to(...));
so it will make dataflow generate a lot of data evenly in parallel.
Easy, just extend Source class with your own number generator: https://cloud.google.com/dataflow/model/custom-io
Related
I have following question. I set up an camel -project to parse certain xml files. I have to selecting take out certain nodes from a file.
I have two files 246kb and 347kb in size. I am extracting a parent-child pair of 250 nodes in the above given example.
With the default factory here are the times. For the 246kb file respt 77secs and 106 secs. I wanted to improve the performance so switched to saxon and the times are as follows 47secs and 54secs. I was able to cut the time down by at least half.
Is it possible to cut the time further, any other factory or optimizations I can use will be appreciated.
I am using XpathBuilder to cut the xpaths out. here is an example. Is it possible to not to have to create XpathBuilder repeatedly, it seems like it has to be constructed for every xpath, I would have one instance and keep pumping the xpaths into it, maybe it will improve performance further.
return XPathBuilder.xpath(nodeXpath)
.saxon()
.namespace(Consts.XPATH_PREFIX, nameSpace)
.evaluate(exchange.getContext(), exchange.getIn().getBody(String.class), String.class);
Adding more details based on Michael's comments. So I am kind of joining them, will become clear with my example below. I am combining them into a json.
So here we go, Lets say we have following mappings for first and second path.
pData.tinf.rexd: bm:Document/bm:xxxxx/bm:PmtInf[{0}]/bm:ReqdExctnDt/text()
pData.tinf.pIdentifi.instId://bm:Document/bm:xxxxx/bm:PmtInf[{0}]/bm:CdtTrfTxInf[{1}]/bm:PmtId/bm:InstrId/text()
This would result in a json as below
pData:{
tinf: {
rexd: <value_from_xml>
}
pIdentifi:{
instId: <value_from_xml>
}
}
Hard to say without seeing your actual XPath expression, but given the file sizes and execution time my guess would be that you're doing a join which is being executed naively as a cartesian product, i.e. with O(n*m) performance. There is probably some way of reorganizing it to have logarithmic performance, but the devil is in the detail. Saxon-EE is quite good at optimizing join queries automatically; if not, there are often ways of doing it manually -- though XSLT gives you more options (e.g. using xsl:key or xsl:merge) than XPath does.
Actually I was able to bring the time down to 10 secs. I am using apache-camel. So I added threads there so that multiple files can be read in separate threads. Once the file was being read, it had serial operation to based on the length of the nodes that had to be traversed. I realized that it was not necessary to be serial here so introduced parrallelStream and that now gave it enough power. One thing to guard agains is not to have a proliferation of threads since that can degrade the performance. So I try to restrict the number of threads to twice or thrice the number of cores on the operating machine.
I'm fairly new to Google Dataflow and I am finding that the service spends several hours estimating the input file size before actually processing data, and will often do several recounts for large input collections before failing. I'm using Apache Beam 2.9 and the io.ReadFromText method.
The logs start with a comment about beginning estimation of input file size and continue to log an update every 10k files counted.
Is there a way to skip this step or to significantly increase the pace in which it does the count?
The Python ReadFromText source is based on FileBasedSource. If you look at the code for it, you can find that its estimate_size method is inefficient for a very large set of files.
As we discussed in the comments, you may be able to improve this bottleneck by manually partitioning the range of files. For example, if your files are gs://my_bucket/file001, gs://my_bucket/file002, ... gs://my_bucket/file999, you should be able to add 10 sources, something like so:
p = Pipeline()
file_lines = (
[p | ReadFromText('gs://my_bucket/file%s*' % i) for i in range(10)]
| beam.Flatten())
This should help your pipeline scale for a case like this.
As for a permanent solution... I imagine that one could try to propose improvements to the source itself, so that a future version may have better performance.
There are also transforms based on Java's FileIO transforms that we are planning to implement. That may be helpful as well. But it's not so near in the horizon.
I've created a Dask cluster on my laptop, and have loaded a NetCDF dataset on it using xarray.open_dataset('some_data.nc',chunks={'lat':'auto', 'lon':'auto', 'time':-1})
I've converted this to a distributed array of time series, ts, one per (lat,lon) pair. For this array, ts.chunks is:
((1555200, 1555200, 1555200, 1555200, 1555200, 1555200), (12,))
Now what I'd like to do is create one heapq per chunk with entries computed one per row of each chunk. I was hoping I could use map_blocks for this, but I don't see how. Also, I want to do some reduction based on those heaps.
Is there a straightforward way to accomplish this? Thanks.
One simple way to accomplish this would be to switch to Dask delayed. See https://docs.dask.org/en/latest/delayed-collections.html
I had an pre-interview task, which I have completed and the solution works, however I was marked down and did not get an interview due to having used a TADODataset. I basically imported a CSV file which populated the dataset, the data had to be processed in a specific way, so I used Filtering and Sorting of the dataset to make sure that the data was ordered in the way I wanted it and then I did the logic processing in a while loop. The feedback that was received said that this was bad as it would be very slow for large files.
My main question here is if using an in memory dataset is slow for processing large files, what would have been better way to access the information from the csv file. Should I have used String Lists or something like that?
It really depends on how "big" and the available resources(in this case RAM) for the task.
"The feedback that was received said that this was bad as it would be very slow for large files."
CSV files are usually used for moving data around(in most cases that I've encountered files are ~1MB+ up to ~10MB, but that's not to say that others would not dump more data in CSV format) without worrying too much(if at all) about import/export since it is extremely simplistic.
Suppose you have a 80MB CSV file, now that's a file you want to process in chunks, otherwise(depending on your processing) you can eat hundreds of MB of RAM, in this case what I would do is:
while dataToProcess do begin
// step1
read <X> lines from file, where <X> is the max number of lines
you read in one go, if there are less lines(i.e. you're down to 50 lines and X is 100)
to process, then you read those
// step2
process information
// step3
generate output, database inserts, etc.
end;
In the above case, you're not loading 80MB of data into RAM, but only a few hundred KB, and the rest you use for processing, i.e. linked lists, dynamic insert queries(batch insert), etc.
"...however I was marked down and did not get an interview due to having used a TADODataset."
I'm not surprised, they were probably looking to see if you're capable of creating algorithm(s) and provide simple solutions on the spot, but without using "ready-made" solutions.
They were probably thinking of seeing you use dynamic arrays and creating one(or more) sorting algorithm(s).
"Should I have used String Lists or something like that?"
The response might have been the same, again, I think they wanted to see how you "work".
The interviewer was quite right.
The correct, scalable and fastest solution on any medium file upwards is to use an 'external sort'.
An 'External Sort' is a 2 stage process, the first stage being to split each file into manageable and sorted smaller files. The second stage is to merge these files back into a single sorted file which can then be processed line by line.
It is extremely efficient on any CSV file with over say 200,000 lines. The amount of memory the process runs in can be controlled and thus dangers of running out of memory can be eliminated.
I have implemented many such sort processes and in Delphi would recommend a combination of TStringList, TList and TQueue classes.
Good Luck
I'm trying to do the following in hadoop map/reduce( written in java, linux kernel OS)
Text files 'rules-1' and 'rules-2' (total 3GB in size) contains some rules, each rule are separated by endline character, so the files can be read using readLine() function.
These files 'rules-1' and 'rules-2' needs to be imported as a whole from hdfs in every map function in my cluster i.e. these file are not splittable across different map function.
Input to the mapper's map function is a text file called 'record' (each line is terminated by endline character), so from the 'record' file we get the (key, value) pair. The file is splittable and can be given as input to different map function used in the whole map/reduce process.
What needs to be done is compare each value(i.e. lines from record file) with the rules inside 'rules-1' and 'rules-2'
Problem is, if I pull out each line of rules-1 and rules-2 files to a static arraylist only once, so that each mapper can share the same arraylint and try to compare elements in the arraylist with the each input value from the record file, I get a memory overflow error, since 3GB cannot be stored at a time in the arraylist.
Alternatively, if I import only few lines from the rules-1 and rules-2 files at a time and compare them to each value, map/reduce is taking a lot time to finish its job.
Could you guys provide me any other alternative ideas how can this be done without the memory overflow error? Will it help if I put those file-1 and file-2 inside a hdfs supporting database or something? I'm going out of ideas actually.Would really appreciate if some of you guys could provide me your valuable suggestions.
Iif you input files are small - you can load them into static variables and use rules as an input.
If above is not a case I can suggest the following ways:
a) To give rule-1 and rule-2 high replication factor close to the number of nodes you have. Then you can read from HDFS rule=1 and rule-2 for each record in the input relatively efficient - because it will be sequential read from the local datanode.
b) If you can consider some hash function which, when applied to the rule and to the input string will predict without false negatives that they can match - then you can emit this hash for rules, input record and resolve all possible matches in the reducer. It will be very similar to the way how a join is done using MR
c) I would consider some other optimization techniques like building search trees, or sorting since otherwise the problem looks computationally expensive and will took forever...
On this page find Real-World Cluster Configurations
it will cover file size configuration
You could use the param "mapred.child.java.opts" in conf/mapred-site.xml to increase the memory for your mappers. You might not be able to run as many map slots per server but with more servers in your cluster you could still parallelize your job.
Read the content text file from the MapReduce function and read the keyword text file from the mapper function (for reading your HDFS) and split using StringTokenizer value.toString reading from MapReduce and in your mapper function write HDFS read text file code it will read line-by-line so use two while loops here you compare. Whenever you want data send it to reducer.
Split the 3gb text file into several text files and apply that all text files as usual MapReduce your previous program.
For splitting text file I written Java program and you decide how many lines you want write in each text file.