[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-376?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14057092#comment-14057092
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on STORM-376:
--------------------------------------
Github user ptgoetz commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-storm/pull/168#issuecomment-48561812
Looks fine to me. I'd be interested in hearing what change in ZK-related
performance characteristics you've seen.
Should we consider a configuration switch for this?
> Add compression to data stored in ZK
> ------------------------------------
>
> Key: STORM-376
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STORM-376
> Project: Apache Storm (Incubating)
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Robert Joseph Evans
> Assignee: Robert Joseph Evans
> Attachments: storm-2000.png
>
>
> If you run zookeeper with -Dzookeeper.forceSync=no the zookeeper disk no
> longer is the bottleneck for scaling storm. For us on a Gigabit Ethernet
> (scale test cluster) it becomes the aggregate reads by all of the supervisors
> and workers trying to download the compiled topology assignments.
> To reduce this load we took two approaches. First we compressed the data
> being stored in zookeeper (this JIRA) which also has the added benefit of
> increasing the size of the topology you can store in ZK. Second we used the
> ZK version number to see if the data had changed and avoid downloading it
> again needlessly (STORM-375).
> With these changes we were able to scale to a simulated 1965 nodes (5
> supervisors running on each of 393 real nodes, with each supervisor
> configured to have 10 slots). We also filled the cluster with 131 topologies
> of 100 workers each. (we are going to 200 topos, and may try to scale the
> cluster even larger, but it takes forever to launch topologies once the
> cluster is under load. We may try to address that shortly too)
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
