Derek do you have an idea for a fix? On Mar 20, 2014, at 3:43 PM, Derek Dagit <[email protected]> wrote:
>> As I said above, this fix is the most important in my opinion. >> STORM-259 (Random#nextInt) is new to me -- can't say whether it's as >> important as STORM-187 or not. > > Yeah, we found it recently, and I created it this morning after reading > Taylor's mail. > > STORM-187 can be a problem with fewer than 30 retries (likelihood depends on > configuration), but we will hit STORM-259 when retries exceeds 30. > > -- > Derek > > On 3/20/14, 14:18, Michael G. Noll wrote: >> On my side the most important change is, as you point out, STORM-187. >> The primary reason is like Adam Lewis is pointing out because it's a >> stability problem. The secondary aspect is that this issue taints the >> new Netty backend, and at least IMHO the faster Storm could confidently >> bury ZeroMQ the better. :-) >> >> As I said above, this fix is the most important in my opinion. >> STORM-259 (Random#nextInt) is new to me -- can't say whether it's as >> important as STORM-187 or not. >> >> Switching to my non-essential wishlist I'd also +1 STORM-252 (Upgrade >> Curator and thus ZooKeeper to 3.4.5). We have been running ZK 3.4.5 >> anyway for a couple of reasons, and it would be nice to have official >> Storm support for the latest ZK version (ok, the recently released ZK >> 3.4.6 is actually the latest but hey). Although I don't know how >> confident we are that the code in STORM-252 actually works, i.e. whether >> integrating STORM-252 into 0.9.2 on such short notice would be jumping >> the gun or a safe move. >> >> Btw, in terms of Storm/Kafka integration Kafka is in the same boat: >> it's built against ZK 3.3.x, and LinkedIn recommends the use of ZK 3.3.4 >> in the docs. There's an open ticket KAFKA-854 [1] that's basically the >> equivalent of STORM-252, but I'm not sure how actively the Kafka team is >> working on that. >> >> Best, >> Michael >> >> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-854 >> >> >> >> On 03/20/2014 02:33 AM, P. Taylor Goetz wrote: >>> I'd like to get this discussion started, largely because the "negative >>> timeout" bug (STORM-187) really bothers me. I've not seen it in the wild, >>> but I've heard of a few cases where it was enough to hinder upgrading. >>> >>> HEAD looks good to me at the moment, with the major difference being the >>> zookeeper update and the patch mentioned above. >>> >>> Any thoughts on other PRs or patches to include? >>> >>> -Taylor >>
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
