The reason was that the last year there is no significant releases of Ignite between 2.7 and 2.8, only minor releases with long story of renaming. I am and another ML guys are ready in 1-2 months prepare ML module for 2.8 or for the minor release 2.7.7 = 2.7.6 + updated ML + new fixed bugs
Let's discuss it in separate thread next week пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 21:55, Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org>: > Alexey, I'm wondering, > > Are there any dependencies on Ignite Core that make us put off the ML > changes release until 2.8? I know that you do not support the idea of ML as > a separate Ignite module but this concept would allow us to release ML as > frequently as we want not being blocked by Ignite core releases. > > > - > Denis > > > On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 11:45 AM Alexey Zinoviev <zaleslaw....@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > I could answer as one of developers of ML module. > > Currently is available the ML in version 2.7.5, it supports a lot of > > algorithms and could be used in production, but the API is not stable and > > will be changed in 2.8 > > > > The ML module will be stable since next release 2.8, also we have no > > performance report to compare for example with Spark ML > > Based on my exploration the performance of in terms of Big O notation is > > the same like in Spark ML (real numbers says that Ignite ML is more > faster > > than Spark ML due to Ignite in-memory nature and so on) > > > > Since 2.8 it will have good integration with TensorFlow, Spark ML, > XGBoost > > via model inference. > > > > You as a user have no ability to run, for-example scikit-learn or R > > packages in distributed mode over Ignite, but you could run the > TensorFlow, > > using Ignite as a distributed back-end instead of Horovod. > > > > If you have any questions, please let me know > > > > > > > > пт, 13 сент. 2019 г. в 21:28, Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org>: > > > >> David, > >> > >> Let me loop in Ignite dev list that has Ignite ML experts subscribed. > >> Please, could you share more details in regards to your performance > >> testing > >> and objectives for Ignite ML overall? > >> > >> The module is ready for production and we're ready to help solve any > >> cornerstones. > >> > >> - > >> Denis > >> > >> > >> On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 4:50 AM David Williams <leeon2...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > Python is 25 times slower than Java for ML at runtimes, which I found > >> out > >> > online. But I don't know that statement is true or not. I need > insiders' > >> > opinion. Which ml other packages are best options for Ignite? > >> > > >> > On Fri, Sep 6, 2019 at 7:28 PM Mikael <mikael-arons...@telia.com> > >> wrote: > >> > > >> >> Hi! > >> >> > >> >> I have never used it myself but it's been there for long time and I > >> >> would expect it to be stable, and yes it will run distributed, I > can't > >> >> say anything about performance as I have never used it. > >> >> > >> >> You will find a lot of more information at: > >> >> > >> >> https://apacheignite.readme.io/docs/machine-learning > >> >> > >> >> Mikael > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> Den 2019-09-06 kl. 11:50, skrev David Williams: > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > I am evaluating ML framework for Java platform. I knew Ignite has > ML > >> >> > package. > >> >> > But I like to know its stability and performance for production. > Can > >> >> > Ignite > >> >> > ML code run in distribute way? > >> >> > > >> >> > Except its own ML package, which ml packages are best options for > >> >> Ignite? > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >
