Hi,

I prepared this notes doc trying to capture the ideas and thoughts we have
so far.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tY2rBKw9c-WBGde8oWKlIq0Owvhqo04tm1hbFQpLuQ4/edit#

It is very likely that I missed a lot of things, plus it is still early
stage now and brainstorming can be super helpful. So please feel free to
add/comment/edit.

Thanks in advance!


On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Fu Maosong <[email protected]> wrote:

> @Sanjeev and @ning could provide more details on them, like pros&cons.
>
> 2017-11-17 17:11 GMT-08:00 Saikat Kanjilal <[email protected]>:
>
>> Hi Fu,
>> Thanks for the proposals, is it possible to outline the pros and cons
>> that you guys discussed?  That would help the community in weighing in on
>> this.
>> Thanks in advance
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Nov 17, 2017, at 4:15 PM, Fu Maosong <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Today, Ning, Huijun, Sanjeev and Maosong discussed about the
>> bp(back-pressure) today, and here are the notes:
>>
>> *Two major issues of current bp algorithm*:
>> 1. one single point of bp will stop the whole topology
>> 2. when a topology in bp state, the overall throughput for the whole
>> topology can reduce
>>
>> *Some proposals*:
>> For 1.
>> - load shedding -- for example, drop tuples in stmgr.
>> - better bp algo. -- no need to stop the whole topology; can just handle
>> the slowness to particular instances, for example, spill the buffer to the
>> disk
>>
>> For 2.
>> - Rate control on the source(spout) side. So even in bp state, the overall
>> throughput can be higher than normal
>> - Run-time scale-up
>>
>> Let me know if I missing anything.
>>
>> --
>> With my best Regards
>> ------------------
>> Fu Maosong
>> Twitter Inc.
>> Mobile: +001-415-244-7520
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> With my best Regards
> ------------------
> Fu Maosong
> Twitter Inc.
> Mobile: +001-415-244-7520
>

Reply via email to