[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-329?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14326559#comment-14326559
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on STORM-329:
--------------------------------------
Github user miguno commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/429#issuecomment-74947350
What were the exact REPL and mvn commands?
> On 18.02.2015, at 21:48, P. Taylor Goetz <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> @miguno Regarding the merge to 0.9.x, I didn't have that much time to
debug the test failures. There are 2 errors in auth_test.clj when run as part
of the maven build. When run in a repl, I don't get any failures.
>
> Anyway, the results of the merge are here:
>
> https://github.com/ptgoetz/storm/tree/storm-329-0.9
>
> I'll try to dig in a little deeper when I have more time.
>
> —
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
>
> Fix cascading Storm failure by improving reconnection strategy and buffering
> messages
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: STORM-329
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-329
> Project: Apache Storm
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Affects Versions: 0.9.2-incubating, 0.9.3
> Reporter: Sean Zhong
> Assignee: Michael Noll
> Labels: Netty
> Fix For: 0.10.0
>
> Attachments: storm-329.patch, worker-kill-recover3.jpg
>
>
> _Note: The original title of this ticket was: "Add Option to Config Message
> handling strategy when connection timeout"._
> This is to address a [concern brought
> up|https://github.com/apache/incubator-storm/pull/103#issuecomment-43632986]
> during the work at STORM-297:
> {quote}
> [~revans2] wrote: Your logic makes since to me on why these calls are
> blocking. My biggest concern around the blocking is in the case of a worker
> crashing. If a single worker crashes this can block the entire topology from
> executing until that worker comes back up. In some cases I can see that being
> something that you would want. In other cases I can see speed being the
> primary concern and some users would like to get partial data fast, rather
> then accurate data later.
> Could we make it configurable on a follow up JIRA where we can have a max
> limit to the buffering that is allowed, before we block, or throw data away
> (which is what zeromq does)?
> {quote}
> If some worker crash suddenly, how to handle the message which was supposed
> to be delivered to the worker?
> 1. Should we buffer all message infinitely?
> 2. Should we block the message sending until the connection is resumed?
> 3. Should we config a buffer limit, try to buffer the message first, if the
> limit is met, then block?
> 4. Should we neither block, nor buffer too much, but choose to drop the
> messages, and use the built-in storm failover mechanism?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
