@Reuven,
Tell me if I can help on that
Etienne
Le 15/09/2017 à 06:44, Reuven Lax a écrit :
It's being worked on. Turns out there are some modifications still needed
to the NexMark queries.
Reuven
On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 9:33 PM, Pei HE <[email protected]> wrote:
Could any Googlers help to run NexMark on Dataflow streaming and share the
numbers with the community?
--
Pei
On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 11:28 PM, Lukasz Cwik <[email protected]>
wrote:
Etienne, cut some JIRAs for improvements like ValidatesRunner for the
Nexmark suite that you think are worthy. Some of them might be good
'starter' tasks as well.
On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 1:43 AM, Etienne Chauchot <[email protected]>
wrote:
Hi guys,
There is also some points to discuss:
- I think some of the tests in this test suite should be generalized as
validatesRunner tests like it was done for example for custom window
merging (https://github.com/apache/beam/blob/5181e619f17e1f69fabe8d5
bdfc7a3a6a2142cde/sdks/java/core/src/test/java/org/apache/
beam/sdk/transforms/windowing/WindowTest.java#L591)
- We have run almost no tests on Dataflow, so if someone could run the
test suite on dataflow, he's very welcome. All needed information are
still
in the README, but I'll move these info to the website.
- other points?
WDYT?
Best,
Etienne
Le 24/08/2017 à 18:35, Lukasz Cwik a écrit :
Yeah, was looking forward to this.
On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 9:20 AM, Tyler Akidau
<[email protected]
wrote:
Awesome news, thank you! :-D
On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 12:40 AM Etienne Chauchot <
[email protected]
wrote:
Hi all,
I wanted to let you know that the Nexmark PR is merged into master.
Feel
free to use it (e.g. performance testing, release testing ...).
Etienne
Le 12/05/2017 à 10:55, Etienne Chauchot a écrit :
Hi guys,
I wanted to let you know that I have just submitted a PR around
NexMark. This is a port of the NexMark queries to Beam, to be used
as
integration tests.
This can also be used as A-B testing (no-regression or performance
comparison between 2 versions of the same engine or of the same
runner)
This a continuation of the previous PR (#99) from Mark Shields.
The code has changed quite a bit: some queries have changed to use
new
Beam APIs and there where some big refactorings. More important, we
can now run all the queries in all the runners.
Nevertheless, there are still some open issues in Nexmark
(https://github.com/iemejia/beam/issues) and in Beam upstream (see
issue links in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-160)
I wanted to submit the PR before our (Ismaël and I) NexMark talk at
the ApacheCon. The PR is not perfect but it is in a good shape to
share it.
Best,
Etienne
Le 22/03/2017 à 04:51, Kenneth Knowles a écrit :
This is great! Having a variety of realistic-ish pipelines running
on
all
runners complements the validation suite and IO IT work.
If I recall, some of these involve heavy and esoteric uses of
state,
so
definitely give me a ping if you hit any trouble.
Kenn
On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Etienne Chauchot <
[email protected]>
wrote:
Hi all,
Ismael and I are working on upgrading the Nexmark implementation
for
Beam.
See https://github.com/iemejia/beam/tree/BEAM-160-nexmark and
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-160. We are
continuing
the
work done by Mark Shields. See https://github.com/apache/
beam/pull/366
for the original PR.
The PR contains queries that have a wide coverage of the Beam
model
and
that represent a realistic end user use case (some come from client
experience on Google Cloud Dataflow).
So far, we have upgraded the implementation to the latest Beam
snapshot.
And we are able to execute a good subset of the queries in the
different
runners. We upgraded the nexmark drivers to do so: direct driver
(upgraded
from inProcessDriver) and flink driver and we added a new one for
spark.
There is still a good amount of work to do and we would like to
know
if
you think that this contribution can have its place into Beam
eventually.
The interests of having Nexmark on Beam that we have seen so far
are:
- Rich batch/streaming test
- A-B testing of runners or runtimes (non-regression, performance
comparison between versions ...)
- Integration testing (sdk/runners, runner/runtime, ...)
- Validate beam capability matrix
- It can be used as part of the ongoing PerfKit work (if there is
any
interest).
As a final note, we are tracking the issues in the same repo. If
someone
is interested in contributing, or have more ideas, you are
welcome
:)
Etienne
