Absolutely. Thank you very much :-)
On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 10:35 PM, Matthias J. Sax <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Navin,
>
> you do not need to worry about concurrency. because each task is
> basically an individual instance of your Spout/Bolt class.
>
> Thus, it cannot happen, that execute() is called on the same spout/bolt
> object by different threads at the same time. It can only happen, that
> execute() is called on different objects at the same time by different
> threads -- but that is no concurrency issue.
>
> Of course, you must not have static member variables in you code! But
> this is a general requirement and not directly related to executor/task
> model.
>
> Hope this answers your question.
>
> -Matthias
>
> On 06/01/2016 10:21 AM, Navin Ipe wrote:
> > Thanks Matthias. I just verified this and found why there's this
> > confusion about tasks.
> >
> > In this case:
> > int BoltParallelism = 3;
> > int BoltTaskParallelism = 2;
> > builder.setBolt("bolt1", new BoltA(), *BoltParallelism*)
> > .setNumTasks(*BoltTaskParallelism*)
> >
> > BoltParallelism is indeed the number of executors and
> > BoltTaskParallelism is indeed the number of tasks.
> >
> > BUT
> >
> > int BoltParallelism = 3;
> > builder.setBolt("bolt1", new BoltA(), *BoltParallelism*)
> >
> > When you don't specify setNumTasks, Storm creates BoltParallelism number
> > of tasks and creates BoltParallelism number of executors as well.
> >
> > *To your reply of "/No. All executors run in parallel/":*
> > When I have 3 tasks and 3 executors, I won't have to worry about
> > concurrency inside the Bolt, right? Because every Bolt instance is being
> > run in a separate thread, so all their member variables and functions
> > are specific to the executor.
> > Also, even if I have 3 tasks and 1 executor, every task is going to be
> > run one after the other by the executor, so there's no worry about
> > concurrency here either.
> >
> > So in what situation would I have to worry about concurrency? AFAIK,
> > even in a single bolt, the execute() function has to complete before the
> > same execute() is invoked again.
> >
> >
> > On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 12:54 AM, Matthias J. Sax <[email protected]
> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> >
> > Answers inline.
> >
> > I guess you are not aware, that a worker run other thread next to the
> > executors, too. For example, there are two threads (one for input;
> one
> > for output), that work as "dispatcher" for incoming messages. There
> is a
> > global input queue, and the dispatcher "forwards" incoming messages
> to
> > the individual tasks queues such that the executors can all work in
> > parallel. Same for output. Executors write into own output queues
> and a
> > single "output thread" reads the data from there and take care of
> > network transfer to downstream bolts.
> >
> > -Matthias
> >
> > On 05/16/2016 06:24 PM, Navin Ipe wrote:
> > > Err...guys....I appreciate the ongoing discussion, but the original
> > > question remains unanswered. The one I've asked at the very
> beginning of
> > > this conversation. Some help would be appreciated.
> > > Referring to the code I posted and as per Nathan's answer, you say
> that
> > > int *BoltParallelism* actually represents the tasks
> >
> > No. *BoltParallslim* is the number of executor threads.
> >
> > which are the number
> > > of instances of Bolts/Spouts? And BoltTaskParallelism is the
> number of
> > > executors (OS threads)?
> >
> > No. This is the number of tasks.
> >
> > > If that's the case, then execute() will get called only after the
> > > previous execute() call of a Bolt has completed. And nextTuple()
> will
> > > get called only after the previous nextTuple() of a Spout has
> completed.
> >
> > For a single executor, yes.
> >
> > > That's a bit reassuring, since now one does not have to cater to
> > > multithreading within a Spout/Bolt.
> >
> > No. All executors run in parallel.
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 7:07 PM, Matthias J. Sax <[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>
> > > <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > >
> > > So this is not correct:
> > > > and
> > > > the Bolt creates a task for processing each incoming Tuple.
> > >
> > > Storm create exactly *BoltTaskParallelism* tasks and assigns
> incoming
> > > messages to tasks (according to the used connection pattern --
> shuffle,
> > > fieldsGrouping etc).
> > >
> > > Futhermore:
> > >
> > > > If there
> > > > are not enough tasks, then the excess Tuples are made to
> wait in a
> > > > queue of the executor.
> > >
> > > No. There is no thing as "not enough tasks". Each task has its
> own input
> > > queue/buffer and tuple are stored there.
> > >
> > > The executor threads process one or multiple tasks. Thus, if a
> task is
> > > currently "on hold", new tuples are just added to the task's
> input
> > > queue. If an executor picks up on of its tasks for processing,
> the
> > > buffered tuples of the task are processed.
> > >
> > >
> > > -Matthias
> > >
> > > On 05/16/2016 09:07 AM, Adrien Carreira wrote:
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > > 2016-05-16 6:40 GMT+02:00 Navin Ipe <
> [email protected]
> > <mailto:[email protected]>
> > <mailto:[email protected]
> > <mailto:[email protected]>>
> > > > <mailto:[email protected]
> > <mailto:[email protected]>
> > > <mailto:[email protected]
> > <mailto:[email protected]>>>>:
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I've seen the explanations
> > > >
> > >
> > <
> http://www.michael-noll.com/blog/2012/10/16/understanding-the-parallelism-of-a-storm-topology/
> >,
> > > > but none of them explain it in terms of what I see in
> > the code. This
> > > > is what I understood:
> > > >
> > > > int BoltParallelism = 3;
> > > > int BoltTaskParallelism = 2;
> > > > builder.setBolt("bolt1", new BoltA(), *BoltParallelism*)
> > > > .setNumTasks(*BoltTaskParallelism*)
> > > >
> > > > BoltParallelism creates 3 instances of BoltA. These are
> the
> > > executors.
> > > > BoltTaskParallelism allows Tuples to come into BoltA very
> > > fast, and
> > > > the Bolt creates a task for processing each incoming
> > Tuple. If
> > > there
> > > > are not enough tasks, then the excess Tuples are made to
> > wait in a
> > > > queue of the executor.
> > > >
> > > > Strange thing is that the explanation says the tasks are
> > run in a
> > > > single thread, so obviously I misunderstood something.
> > Could you
> > > > help me understand it?
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Navin
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Regards,
> > > Navin
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Navin
>
>
--
Regards,
Navin
