thanks Bobby for your reply. I thought it might cause problems in the
background and i was looking for an alternative way with lower overhead.
Actually i can remove the old tasks from current slot and occupy a new slot
and put together all those tasks, but i'm worried freeing a slot and taking
another one causes too much overhead and reduces performance. is that right
or i shouldn't be worried too much about it.

thanks again for your time.
appreciate it

Regards

On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 7:34 PM Bobby Evans <ev...@yahoo-inc.com.invalid>
wrote:

> I am not completely sure why that was a requirement.  I know internally we
> have removed it, not sure if we pushed that change back or not yet.  On
> newer versions of storm 1.0.3+ that have the rewritten supervisor that
> check is invalid and you should be able to remove the check and just update
> the slot.  You might be able to get away with it on older versions too, I
> just don't know.  I think it had something to do with race conditions in
> both the supervisor where if the scheduling changed without clearing it out
> first the supervisor would not know that it changed and not do the right
> thing.
> - Bobby
>
>
> On Tuesday, August 1, 2017, 4:16:10 PM CDT, AMir Firouzi <
> firouz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I need some migration features for my scheduler in storm. i schedule the
> tasks first time based on some logic and then after a while i need to
> migrate some tasks to another workers. but after doing so if i assign the
> task to an already used slot storm(nimbus) nags about not being able to use
> an already used slot. is it impossible to do so? otherwise i have to use
> another slots while some old used slots have the capacity to contains more
> tasks and also compacting related tasks to a slot reduces intra-worker
> traffic.
>
> thanks
>

Reply via email to