+1 Ryan and Otto's comments.

I also strongly think we need to make a demo environment easier, but that
should be different than quick-dev.

Jon

On Thu, Oct 13, 2016 at 1:15 PM Otto Fowler <ottobackwa...@gmail.com> wrote:

> - create scripts/utilities to easily run a topology locally in an IDE
> instead of in the VM
>
>
> ^^^^^^^^ THIS.
>
>
> On October 13, 2016 at 12:36:45, Ryan Merriman (merrim...@gmail.com)
> wrote:
>
> Working with the quick-dev vagrant VM recently left a lot to be desired.
> All forthcoming comments are made under the assumption that this VM is
> intended for development purposes. If that is not true, I think we should
> consider adding a VM for this purpose (or Docker containers?). Here are
> the issues I ran into that I think can be improved:
>
> - had to upgrade VirtualBox from 5.0.16 to 5.0.20
> - had to update to the latest metron/hdp-base Vagrant box
> - takes forever to spin up
> - VM is constrained for resources making it unstable
> - spent a large amount of time troubleshooting sensors (no raw messages
> in Kafka)
> - no easy way to debug topologies
>
> Fortunately I think we can make this a much better experience without a
> major effort. Here are my ideas to do this:
>
> - update the prereqs for VirtualBox
> - add a check for the appropriate base box version (Jira has already
> been created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-497)
> - don't install any sensors and replace them with a data generator that
> just loops through sample data and emits to Kafka (could also be used to
> replay and troubleshoot edge cases)
> - everything in monit is off by default except for ES or other critical
> services
> - create scripts/utilities to easily run a topology locally in an IDE
> instead of in the VM
> - improved documentation with examples of how to run and troubleshoot
> topologies
>
> Is this a worthwhile effort? I think this would also give users an easier
> path to demonstrate or tour Metron's capabilities. Are there any other
> improvements people would like to see? Should we wait for Docker?
> Thoughts?
>
> Ryan Merriman
>
-- 

Jon

Reply via email to