-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/50082/#review142459
-----------------------------------------------------------


Fix it, then Ship it!





samza-core/src/main/scala/org/apache/samza/container/RunLoop.scala (line 79)
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/50082/#comment208023>

    Shall we move this line in the process() function?


- Xinyu Liu


On July 15, 2016, 7:59 p.m., Chris Pettitt wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/50082/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated July 15, 2016, 7:59 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for samza.
> 
> 
> Repository: samza
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> The delay time for the disk quotas feature is currently unbounded which
> can cause delays to become excessive e.g. in the case of a badly time GC
> pause. This change provides the ability to set a maximum delay, which
> defaults to 1 second.
> 
> This patch also improves the measurement of processing time. The process
> method in RunLoop potentially blocks waiting to receive a new message.
> This time should obviously not be included in the delay calculations.
> Instead we split out message polling and process and apply delay
> calculations only to the processing time.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   samza-core/src/main/java/org/apache/samza/util/ThrottlingExecutor.java 
> 214cefd4e8698fada6fc1bb14ab79be6afb27b9d 
>   samza-core/src/main/scala/org/apache/samza/container/RunLoop.scala 
> cf05c15c836ddfa54ba8fe27abc18ed88ac5fc11 
>   samza-core/src/main/scala/org/apache/samza/container/SamzaContainer.scala 
> 18c09224bbae959342daf9b2b7a7d971cc224f48 
>   samza-core/src/test/java/org/apache/samza/util/TestThrottlingExecutor.java 
> 26590507b9c72a8c64171aeb1e5b7c3d5c24c41a 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/50082/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> gradle test
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Chris Pettitt
> 
>

Reply via email to