CFP last date
20 June 2024
Reseach Article

Partition Aware Graph Computation Engine

Published on May 2016 by Snehal V. Zargad, Vikas P. Mapari
National Conference on Advancements in Computer & Information Technology
Foundation of Computer Science USA
NCACIT2016 - Number 3
May 2016
Authors: Snehal V. Zargad, Vikas P. Mapari
dda217cd-8c68-4134-b535-99dd99701a58

Snehal V. Zargad, Vikas P. Mapari . Partition Aware Graph Computation Engine. National Conference on Advancements in Computer & Information Technology. NCACIT2016, 3 (May 2016), 1-4.

@article{
author = { Snehal V. Zargad, Vikas P. Mapari },
title = { Partition Aware Graph Computation Engine },
journal = { National Conference on Advancements in Computer & Information Technology },
issue_date = { May 2016 },
volume = { NCACIT2016 },
number = { 3 },
month = { May },
year = { 2016 },
issn = 0975-8887,
pages = { 1-4 },
numpages = 4,
url = { /proceedings/ncacit2016/number3/24709-3045/ },
publisher = {Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA},
address = {New York, USA}
}
%0 Proceeding Article
%1 National Conference on Advancements in Computer & Information Technology
%A Snehal V. Zargad
%A Vikas P. Mapari
%T Partition Aware Graph Computation Engine
%J National Conference on Advancements in Computer & Information Technology
%@ 0975-8887
%V NCACIT2016
%N 3
%P 1-4
%D 2016
%I International Journal of Computer Applications
Abstract

Graph Partition quality influences the final execution of parallel diagram reckoning frameworks. The character of a diagram section is measured by the feat variable and edge cut proportion. Associate in Nursing adjusted Graph allotment with very little edge cut proportion is for the foremost half favored since it decreases the extravagant system correspondence value. All the same, as indicated by Associate in Nursing empirical study on Graph, the execution over a great deal divided Graph is also even twice additional too bad than basic discretionary allotments. This can be on the grounds that these frameworks upgrade for the fundamental section procedures and cannot proficiently handle the increasing work of close message making ready once a good diagram allotment is employed. During this paper, a system tend to propose a unique allotment conscious Graph reckoning motor named PAGE, that prepares another message processor and a dynamic concurrency management model. The new message processor at the same time forms close and remote messages during a brought along manner. The dynamic model adaptively conforms the concurrency of the processor taking into consideration the web measurements. The explorative assessment exhibits the predominance of PAGE over the diagram allotments with totally different qualities.

References
  1. Yingxia Shao at el (2015), "PAGE: A Partition Aware Engine for Parallel Graph Computation",, VOL. 27, NO. 2, 2015
  2. A. Amr at el (2013), "Distributed largescale natural graph factorization," in Proc. 22nd Int. Conf. World Wide Web, 2013.
  3. N. Backman at el (2012), "Managing parallelism for stream processing in the cloud," in Proc. 1sInt. Workshop Hot Topics Cloud Data Process. , 2012, pp. 1:1–1:5.
  4. L. Backstrom at el (2006), "Group formation in large social networks: Membership, growth, and evolution," in Proc. 12th ACM SIGKDD Int. Conf. Knowl. Discovery Data Mining, 2006, pp. 44–54.
  5. P. Boldi at el (2004), "The webgraph framework I: Compression techniques," in Proc. 13th Int. Conf. World Wide Web, 2004, pp. 595– 602.
  6. P. Boldi at el (2011), "Layered label propagation: A multiresolution coordinate-free ordering for compressing social networks," in Proc. 20th Int. Conf. World Wide Web, 2011, pp. 587–596.
  7. S. Brin at el (1998) "The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual web search engine," in Proc. 7th Int. Conf. World Wide Web, 1998, pp. 107–117.
  8. A. Chan at el (2005), "CGMGRAPH/CGMLIB: Implementing and testing CGM graph algorithms on PC clusters and shared memory machines," J. High Perform. Comput. Appl. , pp. 81–97, 2005.
  9. G. Cong at el (2010), "Fast PGAS implementation of distributed graph algorithms," in Proc. Int. Conf. High Perform. Comput. , Netw. , Storage Anal. , 2010, pp. 1–11.
  10. J. Dean at el (2004), "MapReduce: Simplified data processing on large clusters," in Proc. Operating Syst. Des. Implementation, 2004, pp. 107–113.
  11. D. Gregor at el (2005), "The parallel BGL: A generic library for distributed graph computations," in Proc. Parallel Object-Oriented Sci. Comput. , 2005, pp. 1–18.
  12. C. A. R. Hoare, "Communicating sequential processes," Commun. ACM, vol. 21, pp. 666–677, 1978.
  13. U. Kang, C. E. Tsourakakis, and C. Faloutsos, "PEGASUS: A petascale graph mining system implementation and observations," in Proc. IEEE 9th Int. Conf. Data Mining, 2009, pp. 229–238.
  14. G. Karypis and V. Kumar, "Multilevel algorithms for multiconstraint graph partitioning," in Proc. ACM/IEEE Conf. Supercomput. , 1998, pp. 1–13.
  15. G. Karypis and V. Kumar, "Parallel multilevel graph partitioning," in Proc. 10th Int. Parallel Process. Symp. , 1996, pp. 314–319.
  16. Y. Low at el (2012), "Distributed graphlab: A framework for machine learning and data mining in the cloud," Proc. VLDB Endowment, vol. 5, pp. 716–727, 2012.
  17. G. Malewicz at el (2010), "Pregel: A system for large-scale graph processing," in Proc. ACM SIGMOD Int. Conf. Manage. Data, 2010, pp. 135–146.
  18. S. Salihoglu and J. Widom, "GPS: A graph processing system," inProc. 25th Int. Conf. Sci. Statist. Database Manage. , 2013, pp. 22:1–22:12.
  19. S. Yingxia, Y. Junjie, C. Bin, and M. Lin, "Page: A partition aware graph computation engine," in Proc. 22nd ACM Int. Conf. Inf. Knowl. Manage. , 2013, pp. 823–828.
  20. I. Stanton and G. Kliot, "Streaming graph partitioning for large distributed graphs," in Proc. 18th ACM SIGKDD Int. Conf. Knowl. Discovery Data Mining, 2012, pp. 1222–1230.
Index Terms

Computer Science
Information Sciences

Keywords

Graph Computation Graph Partition Message Processor