I have this a CassandraTable. Access by SparkContext.cassandraTable(). Retrieve all my CassandraRow.
Now I want to store 3 information: (user, city, byte)
I store like this
rddUsersFilter.map(row =>
(row.getString("user"),(row.getString("city"),row.getString("byte").replace(",","").toLong))).groupByKey
I obtain a RDD[(String, Iterable[(String, Long)])]
Now for each user I want to sum all bytes and create a Map for city like: "city"->"occurencies" (how many time this city appairs for this user).
Previously, I split up this code in two differnt RDD, one to sum byte, the other one to create map as described.
Example for occurency for City
rddUsers.map(user => (user._1, user._2.size, user._2.groupBy(identity).map(city => (city._1,city._2.size))))
that's because I could access to second element of my tuple thanks to ._2 method. But now?
My second element is a Iterable[(String,Long)], and I can't map anymore like I did before.
Is there a solution to retrieve all my information with just one rdd and a single MapReduce?
You could do this easily by first grouping bytes and city occurrence for user,city and then do a group by user
val data = Array(("user1","city1",100),("user1","city1",100),
("user1","city1",100),("user1","city2",100),("user1","city2",100),
("user1","city3",100),("user1","city2",100),("user2","city1",100),
("user2","city2",100))
val rdd = sc.parallelize(data)
val res = rdd.map(x=> ((x._1,x._2),(1,x._3)))
.reduceByKey((x,y)=> (x._1+y._1,x._2+y._2))
.map(x => (x._1._1,(x._1._2,x._2._1,x._2._2)))
.groupByKey
val userCityUsageRdd = res.map(x => {
val m = x._2.toList
(x._1 ,m.map(y => (y._1->y._2)).toMap, m.map(x => x._3).reduce(_+_))
})
output
res20: Array[(String, scala.collection.immutable.Map[String,Int], Int)] =
Array((user1,Map(city1 -> 3, city3 -> 1, city2 -> 3),700),
(user2,Map(city1 -> 1, city2 -> 1),200))
Related
I have RDD[(String, String, Int)] and want to use reduceByKey to get the result as shown below. I don't want it to convert to DF and then perform groupBy operation to get result. Int is constant with value as 1 always.
Is it possible to use reduceByKey here to get the result? Presenting it in Tabularformat for easy reading
Question
String
String
Int
First
Apple
1
Second
Banana
1
First
Flower
1
Third
Tree
1
Result
String
String
Int
First
Apple,Flower
2
Second
Banana
1
Third
Tree
1
You can not use reduceByKey if you have a Tuple3, you could use reduceByKey though if you had RDD[(String, String)].
Also, once you groupBy, you can then apply reduceByKey, but since keys would be unique, it makes no sense to call reduceByKey, therefore we use map to map one on one values.
So, assume df is your main table, then this piece of code:
val rest = df.groupBy(x => x._1).map(x => {
val key = x._1 // ex: First
val groupedData = x._2 // ex: [(First, Apple, 1), (First, Flower, 1)]
// ex: [(First, Apple, 1), (First, Flower, 1)] => [Apple, Flower] => Apple, Flower
val concat = groupedData.map(d => d._2).mkString(",")
// ex: [(First, Apple, 1), (First, Flower, 1)] => [1, 1] => 2
val sum = groupedData.map(d => d._3).sum
(key, concat, sum) // return a tuple3 again, same format
})
Returns this result:
(Second,Banana,1)
(First,Apple,Flower,2)
(Third,Tree,1)
EDIT
Implementing reduceByKey without sum, if your dataset looks like:
val data = List(
("First", "Apple"),
("Second", "Banana"),
("First", "Flower"),
("Third", "Tree")
)
val df: RDD[(String, String)] = sparkSession.sparkContext.parallelize(data)
Then, this:
df.reduceByKey((acc, next) => acc + "," + next)
Gives this:
(First,Apple,Flower)
(Second,Banana)
(Third,Tree)
Good luck!
I have the following RDD[String]:
1:AAAAABAAAAABAAAAABAAABBB
2:BBAAAAAAAAAABBAAAAAAAAAA
3:BBBBBBBBAAAABBAAAAAAAAAA
The first number is supposed to be days and the following characters are events.
I have to calculate the day where each event has the maximum occurrence.
The expected result for this dataset should be:
{ "A" -> Day2 , "B" -> Day3 }
(A has repeated 10 times in day2 and b 10 times in day3)
I am splitting the original dataset
val foo = rdd.map(_.split(":")).map(x => (x(0), x(1).split("")) )
What could be the best implementation for count and aggregation?
Any help is appreciated.
This should do the trick:
import org.apache.spark.sql.functions._
val rdd = sqlContext.sparkContext.makeRDD(Seq(
"1:AAAAABAAAAABAAAAABAAABBB",
"2:BBAAAAAAAAAABBAAAAAAAAAA",
"3:BBBBBBBBAAAABBAAAAAAAAAA"
))
val keys = Seq("A", "B")
val seqOfMaps: RDD[(String, Map[String, Int])] = rdd.map{str =>
val split = str.split(":")
(s"Day${split.head}", split(1).groupBy(a => a.toString).mapValues(_.length))
}
keys.map{key => {
key -> seqOfMaps.mapValues(_.get(key).get).sortBy(a => -a._2).first._1
}}.toMap
The processing that need to be done consist in transforming the data into a rdd that is easy to apply on functions like: find the maximum for a list
I will try to explain step by step
I've used dummy data for "A" and "B" chars.
The foo rdd is the first step it will give you RDD[(String, Array[String])]
Let's extract each char for the Array[String]
val res3 = foo.map{case (d,s)=> (d, s.toList.groupBy(c => c).map{case (x, xs) => (x, xs.size)}.toList)}
(1,List((A,18), (B,6)))
(2,List((A,20), (B,4)))
(3,List((A,14), (B,10)))
Next we will flatMap over values to expand our rdd by char
res3.flatMapValues(list => list)
(3,(A,14))
(3,(B,10))
(1,(A,18))
(2,(A,20))
(2,(B,4))
(1,(B,6))
Rearrange the rdd in order to look better
res5.map{case (d, (s, c)) => (s, c, d)}
(A,20,2)
(B,4,2)
(A,18,1)
(B,6,1)
(A,14,3)
(B,10,3)
Now we are groupy by char
res7.groupBy(_._1)
(A,CompactBuffer((A,18,1), (A,20,2), (A,14,3)))
(B,CompactBuffer((B,6,1), (B,4,2), (B,10,3)))
Finally we are taking the maxium count for each row
res9.map{case (s, list) => (s, list.maxBy(_._2))}
(B,(B,10,3))
(A,(A,20,2))
Hope this help
Previous answers are good, but I prefer such solution:
val data = Seq(
"1:AAAAABAAAAABAAAAABAAABBB",
"2:BBAAAAAAAAAABBAAAAAAAAAA",
"3:BBBBBBBBAAAABBAAAAAAAAAA"
)
val initialRDD = sparkContext.parallelize(data)
// to tuples like (1,'A',18)
val charCountRDD = initialRDD.flatMap(s => {
val parts = s.split(":")
val charCount = parts(1).groupBy(i => i).mapValues(_.length)
charCount.map(i => (parts(0), i._1, i._2))
})
// group by character, and take max value from grouped collection
val result = charCountRDD.groupBy(i => i._2).map(k => k._2.maxBy(z => z._3))
result.foreach(println(_))
Result is:
(3,B,10)
(2,A,20)
I have a file on HDFS in the form of:
61,139,75
63,140,77
64,129,82
68,128,56
71,140,47
73,141,38
75,128,59
64,129,61
64,129,80
64,129,99
I create an RDD from it and and zip the elements with their index:
val data = sc.textFile("hdfs://localhost:54310/usrp/sample.txt")
val points = data.map(s => Vectors.dense(s.split(',').map(_.toDouble)))
val indexed = points.zipWithIndex()
val indexedData = indexed.map{case (value,index) => (index,value)}
Now I need to create rdd1 with the index and the first two elements of each line. Then need to create rdd2 with the index and third element of each row. I am new to Scala, can you please help me with how to do this ?
This does not work since y is not of type Vector but org.apache.spark.mllib.linalg.Vector
val rdd1 = indexedData.map{case (x,y) => (x,y.take(2))}
Basically how to get he first two elements of such a vector ?
Thanks.
You can make use of DenseVector's unapply method to get the underlying Array[Double] in your pattern-matching, and then call take/drop on the Array, re-wrapping it with a Vector:
val rdd1 = indexedData.map { case (i, DenseVector(arr)) => (i, Vectors.dense(arr.take(2))) }
val rdd2 = indexedData.map { case (i, DenseVector(arr)) => (i, Vectors.dense(arr.drop(2))) }
As you can see - this means the original DenseVector you created isn't really that useful, so if you're not going to use indexedData anywhere else, it might be better to create indexedData as a RDD[(Long, Array[Double])] in the first place:
val points = data.map(s => s.split(',').map(_.toDouble))
val indexedData: RDD[(Long, Array[Double])] = points.zipWithIndex().map(_.swap)
val rdd1 = indexedData.mapValues(arr => Vectors.dense(arr.take(2)))
val rdd2 = indexedData.mapValues(arr => Vectors.dense(arr.drop(2)))
Last tip: you probably want to call .cache() on indexedData before scanning it twice to createrdd1 and rdd2 - otherwise the file will be loaded and parsed twice.
You can achieve the above output by following the below steps:
Original Data:
indexedData.foreach(println)
(0,[61.0,139.0,75.0])
(1,[63.0,140.0,77.0])
(2,[64.0,129.0,82.0])
(3,[68.0,128.0,56.0])
(4,[71.0,140.0,47.0])
(5,[73.0,141.0,38.0])
(6,[75.0,128.0,59.0])
(7,[64.0,129.0,61.0])
(8,[64.0,129.0,80.0])
(9,[64.0,129.0,99.0])
RRD1 Data:
Having index along with first two elements of each line.
val rdd1 = indexedData.map{case (x,y) => (x, (y.toArray(0), y.toArray(1)))}
rdd1.foreach(println)
(0,(61.0,139.0))
(1,(63.0,140.0))
(2,(64.0,129.0))
(3,(68.0,128.0))
(4,(71.0,140.0))
(5,(73.0,141.0))
(6,(75.0,128.0))
(7,(64.0,129.0))
(8,(64.0,129.0))
(9,(64.0,129.0))
RRD2 Data:
Having index along with third element of row.
val rdd2 = indexedData.map{case (x,y) => (x, y.toArray(2))}
rdd2.foreach(println)
(0,75.0)
(1,77.0)
(2,82.0)
(3,56.0)
(4,47.0)
(5,38.0)
(6,59.0)
(7,61.0)
(8,80.0)
(9,99.0)
In Apache Spark I have two RDD's. The first data : RDD[(K,V)] containing data in key-value form. The second pairs : RDD[(K,K)] contains a set of interesting key-pairs of this data.
How can I efficiently construct an RDD pairsWithData : RDD[((K,K)),(V,V))], such that it contains all the elements from pairs as the key-tuple and their corresponding values (from data) as the value-tuple?
Some properties of the data:
The keys in data are unique
All entries in pairs are unique
For all pairs (k1,k2) in pairs it is guaranteed that k1 <= k2
The size of 'pairs' is only a constant the size of data |pairs| = O(|data|)
Current data sizes (expected to grow): |data| ~ 10^8, |pairs| ~ 10^10
Current attempts
Here is some example code in Scala:
import org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD
import org.apache.spark.SparkContext._
// This kind of show the idea, but fails at runtime.
def massPairLookup1(keyPairs : RDD[(Int, Int)], data : RDD[(Int, String)]) = {
keyPairs map {case (k1,k2) =>
val v1 : String = data lookup k1 head;
val v2 : String = data lookup k2 head;
((k1, k2), (v1,v2))
}
}
// Works but is O(|data|^2)
def massPairLookup2(keyPairs : RDD[(Int, Int)], data : RDD[(Int, String)]) = {
// Construct all possible pairs of values
val cartesianData = data cartesian data map {case((k1,v1),(k2,v2)) => ((k1,k2),(v1,v2))}
// Select only the values who's keys are in keyPairs
keyPairs map {(_,0)} join cartesianData mapValues {_._2}
}
// Example function that find pairs of keys
// Runs in O(|data|) in real life, but cannot maintain the values
def relevantPairs(data : RDD[(Int, String)]) = {
val keys = data map (_._1)
keys cartesian keys filter {case (x,y) => x*y == 12 && x < y}
}
// Example run
val data = sc parallelize(1 to 12) map (x => (x, "Number " + x))
val pairs = relevantPairs(data)
val pairsWithData = massPairLookup2(pairs, data)
// Print:
// ((1,12),(Number1,Number12))
// ((2,6),(Number2,Number6))
// ((3,4),(Number3,Number4))
pairsWithData.foreach(println)
Attempt 1
First I tried just using the lookup function on data, but that throws an runtime error when executed. It seems like self is null in the PairRDDFunctions trait.
In addition I am not sure about the performance of lookup. The documentation says This operation is done efficiently if the RDD has a known partitioner by only searching the partition that the key maps to. This sounds like n lookups takes O(n*|partition|) time at best, which I suspect could be optimized.
Attempt 2
This attempt works, but I create |data|^2 pairs which will kill performance. I do not expect Spark to be able to optimize that away.
Your lookup 1 doesn't work because you cannot perform RDD transformations inside workers (inside another transformation).
In the lookup 2, I don't think it's necessary to perform full cartesian...
You can do it like this:
val firstjoin = pairs.map({case (k1,k2) => (k1, (k1,k2))})
.join(data)
.map({case (_, ((k1, k2), v1)) => ((k1, k2), v1)})
val result = firstjoin.map({case ((k1,k2),v1) => (k2, ((k1,k2),v1))})
.join(data)
.map({case(_, (((k1,k2), v1), v2))=>((k1, k2), (v1, v2))})
Or in a more dense form:
val firstjoin = pairs.map(x => (x._1, x)).join(data).map(_._2)
val result = firstjoin.map({case (x,y) => (x._2, (x,y))})
.join(data).map({case(x, (y, z))=>(y._1, (y._2, z))})
I don't think you can do it more efficiently, but I might be wrong...
Below is a data structure of List of tuples, ot type List[(String, String, Int)]
val data3 = (List( ("id1" , "a", 1), ("id1" , "a", 1), ("id1" , "a", 1) , ("id2" , "a", 1)) )
//> data3 : List[(String, String, Int)] = List((id1,a,1), (id1,a,1), (id1,a,1),
//| (id2,a,1))
I'm attempting to count the occurences of each Int value associated with each id. So above data structure should be converted to List((id1,a,3) , (id2,a,1))
This is what I have come up with but I'm unsure how to group similar items within a Tuple :
data3.map( { case (id,name,num) => (id , name , num + 1)})
//> res0: List[(String, String, Int)] = List((id1,a,2), (id1,a,2), (id1,a,2), (i
//| d2,a,2))
In practice data3 is of type spark obj RDD , I'm using a List in this example for testing but same solution should be compatible with an RDD . I'm using a List for local testing purposes.
Update : based on following code provided by maasg :
val byKey = rdd.map({case (id1,id2,v) => (id1,id2)->v})
val byKeyGrouped = byKey.groupByKey
val result = byKeyGrouped.map{case ((id1,id2),values) => (id1,id2,values.sum)}
I needed to amend slightly to get into format I expect which is of type
.RDD[(String, Seq[(String, Int)])]
which corresponds to .RDD[(id, Seq[(name, count-of-names)])]
:
val byKey = rdd.map({case (id1,id2,v) => (id1,id2)->v})
val byKeyGrouped = byKey.groupByKey
val result = byKeyGrouped.map{case ((id1,id2),values) => ((id1),(id2,values.sum))}
val counted = result.groupedByKey
In Spark, you would do something like this: (using Spark Shell to illustrate)
val l = List( ("id1" , "a", 1), ("id1" , "a", 1), ("id1" , "a", 1) , ("id2" , "a", 1))
val rdd = sc.parallelize(l)
val grouped = rdd.groupBy{case (id1,id2,v) => (id1,id2)}
val result = grouped.map{case ((id1,id2),values) => (id1,id2,value.foldLeft(0){case (cumm, tuple) => cumm + tuple._3})}
Another option would be to map the rdd into a PairRDD and use groupByKey:
val byKey = rdd.map({case (id1,id2,v) => (id1,id2)->v})
val byKeyGrouped = byKey.groupByKey
val result = byKeyGrouped.map{case ((id1,id2),values) => (id1,id2,values.sum)}
Option 2 is a slightly better option when handling large sets as it does not replicate the id's in the cummulated value.
This seems to work when I use scala-ide:
data3
.groupBy(tupl => (tupl._1, tupl._2))
.mapValues(v =>(v.head._1,v.head._2, v.map(_._3).sum))
.values.toList
And the result is the same as required by the question
res0: List[(String, String, Int)] = List((id1,a,3), (id2,a,1))
You should look into List.groupBy.
You can use the id as the key, and then use the length of your values in the map (ie all the items sharing the same id) to know the count.
#vptheron has the right idea.
As can be seen in the docs
def groupBy[K](f: (A) ⇒ K): Map[K, List[A]]
Partitions this list into a map of lists according to some discriminator function.
Note: this method is not re-implemented by views. This means when applied to a view it will >always force the view and return a new list.
K the type of keys returned by the discriminator function.
f the discriminator function.
returns
A map from keys to lists such that the following invariant holds:
(xs partition f)(k) = xs filter (x => f(x) == k)
That is, every key k is bound to a list of those elements x for which f(x) equals k.
So something like the below function, when used with groupBy will give you a list with keys being the ids.
(Sorry, I don't have access to an Scala compiler, so I can't test)
def f(tupule: A) :String = {
return tupule._1
}
Then you will have to iterate through the List for each id in the Map and sum up the number of integer occurrences. That is straightforward, but if you still need help, ask in the comments.
The following is the most readable, efficient and scalable
data.map {
case (key1, key2, value) => ((key1, key2), value)
}
.reduceByKey(_ + _)
which will give a RDD[(String, String, Int)]. By using reduceByKey it means the summation will paralellize, i.e. for very large groups it will be distributed and summation will happen on the map side. Think about the case where there are only 10 groups but billions of records, using .sum won't scale as it will only be able to distribute to 10 cores.
A few more notes about the other answers:
Using head here is unnecessary: .mapValues(v =>(v.head._1,v.head._2, v.map(_._3).sum)) can just use .mapValues(v =>(v_1, v._2, v.map(_._3).sum))
Using a foldLeft here is really horrible when the above shows .map(_._3).sum will do: val result = grouped.map{case ((id1,id2),values) => (id1,id2,value.foldLeft(0){case (cumm, tuple) => cumm + tuple._3})}