Timeline for Parallel map operations?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 28, 2014 at 11:11 | history | edited | axel22 |
edited tags
|
|
| Nov 20, 2013 at 23:13 | history | edited | csvan | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Clarified
|
| Nov 20, 2013 at 23:12 | comment | added | csvan | Right, fixing that. Also, thanks a lot for the clarification @senia | |
| Nov 20, 2013 at 17:27 | comment | added | Randall Schulz | For the sake of precision in language, "parallel" and "distributed" really should not be conflated. | |
| Nov 20, 2013 at 12:03 | history | edited | om-nom-nom | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
distributed is many-machines-wide, not splitting the workload between threads
|
| Nov 20, 2013 at 11:39 | comment | added | senia |
It's because of the way par method creates parallel collection. For Vector (default IndexedSeq implementation), Range and Array it just wraps initial collection with lightweight wrapper. But for List it should create a completely new collection, it could lead to performance issue. See Creating a Parallel Collection.
|
|
| Nov 20, 2013 at 11:18 | comment | added | csvan | @senia - can you just elaborate shortly on why using a list is a bad idea in this case? I do not need the resulting list to be ordered in any way. | |
| Nov 20, 2013 at 10:34 | comment | added | senia |
Don't use List for distributed (par) operations. You should use an IndexedSeq.
|
|
| Nov 20, 2013 at 10:22 | vote | accept | csvan | ||
| Nov 20, 2013 at 10:10 | answer | added | Akos Krivachy | timeline score: 39 | |
| Nov 20, 2013 at 10:08 | answer | added | mikołak | timeline score: 8 | |
| Nov 20, 2013 at 10:07 | history | asked | csvan | CC BY-SA 3.0 |