The Altair Community is migrating to a new platform to provide a better experience for you. The RapidMiner Community will merge with the Altair Community at the same time. In preparation for the migration, both communities are on read-only mode from July 15th - July 24th, 2024. Technical support via cases will continue to work as is. For any urgent requests from Students/Faculty members, please submit the form linked here.

Rapidminer process's CPU consumption after stopped, is equal to when running???

ruserruser Member Posts: 40 Maven
edited November 2018 in Help
I have the following operators in my process:
- DatabaseExampleSource
- Nominal2Binominal

I found that the Nominal2Binominal was taking too much time because of the bigger table (more than 1.5 hour). Hence, I abrupty stopped the process. But, what I observed was that the CPU is always at the higher utilization percentage (50% by the javaw.exe, i.e. the Rapidminer process), even after the process was stopped. This is the same CPU consumption that I observed when the process was running.

I'm totally puzzled. What is Rapidminer doing even after the process is stopped. I could reproduce it multiple times. It becomes normal, only if the close and reopen the Rapidminer. Closing and opening another process file did not help, and I had to close and restart the Rapidminer completely.

Does anybody have an answer? I have the Rapidminerv4.4 installed on my Windows-XP PC.


  • Options
    fischerfischer Member Posts: 439 Maven

    if you look at the log files you will see that RapidMiner reports that the process will always complete the current operator in the background when stopping a process. This is because the only way to stop a thread immediately in Java is Thread.stop() which has been deprecated ever since I know Java :-) (for good reasons). Some operators check whether or not the process was stopped in their innermost loop so they can react more quickly, but for technical reasons this is not easily possible for the BinaryToNominal operator.

  • Options
    Stefan_EStefan_E Member Posts: 53 Maven
    Hmm... understand - was stumbling over the same behavior with SVMs.

    That's actually quite nasty, because you want to do a grid search for C and gamma, but for some values, the SVM process doesn't seem to converge. So the only way out is go kill RM.

    Similar with some plotters: Either accidentally or out of negligence selecting some of them takes forever if you have many datapoints (just hit 'parallels' on some 30k examples - not a good idea!)

  • Options
    dragoljubdragoljub Member Posts: 241 Contributor II
    I agree,

    There should be some way to kill the currently running process, even if its just a plotting operator. For example, scatter matrix on a moderate amount of samples will usually crash the program, for memory reasons it seems.

Sign In or Register to comment.