Thanks everyone, I'll also take a look to the pool connections but I think for now I'll stay with my current approach.
Cheers, Pablo. On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 5:04 PM, Michael Rose <[email protected]>wrote: > We generally instantiate a pool per JVM, where the maxActive is (# of > bolts using JDBC/num workers+1) (e.g. 64 bolts, 4 workers, 17 conns/JVM). > > Pooling is our preferred strategy as the pool will shrink (and thus use > less memory on the corresponding SQL server) if it's not being utilized. In > either case, t's pushing the management, verification, and reestablishment > of broken connections into the pool (which is also why we have 1 extra conn > -- for when a conn is tied up running a validation query or is being > reestablished). > > Michael Rose (@Xorlev <https://twitter.com/xorlev>) > Senior Platform Engineer, FullContact <http://www.fullcontact.com/> > [email protected] > > > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 8:28 AM, Richards Peter <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Hi Pablo, >> >> Your approach is fine. Alternative approach proposed by Brian can be used >> if you can group the relevant bolt instance/es, which are communicating to >> the database, into the appropriate worker process/es. However with the >> alternative approach you shouldn't end up creating separate pools in all >> the workers used by the topology. >> >> Hope this helps. >> >> Richards Peter. >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 8:33 PM, Pablo Acuña <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I keep one connection per bolt and for now it works just fine with many >>> bolts. I would also be interested in hearing from someone else and share >>> experiences. >>> >>> For now, I open the connection in the method prepare (and close it in >>> cleanup), but to be completely honest, I'm not 100% sure if this is the >>> best approach. >>> >>> cheers, >>> Pablo. >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Brian O'Neill <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> Yes. We use JDBI to access MySQL. >>>> >>>> We've had success with a shared connection pool. (one per JVM) >>>> The bolts in the JVM share the pool. >>>> >>>> But either approach should work (pool per bolt, or connection per bolt). >>>> It just depends at what level you want to manage your connections. >>>> >>>> We do it at the worker level. (n connections per worker) >>>> >>>> -brian >>>> >>>> --- >>>> >>>> Brian O'Neill >>>> >>>> Chief Technology Officer >>>> >>>> >>>> *Health Market Science* >>>> >>>> *The Science of Better Results* >>>> >>>> 2700 Horizon Drive * King of Prussia, PA * 19406 >>>> >>>> M: 215.588.6024 * @boneill42 <http://www.twitter.com/boneill42> * >>>> >>>> healthmarketscience.com >>>> >>>> >>>> This information transmitted in this email message is for the intended >>>> recipient only and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If >>>> you received this email in error and are not the intended recipient, or the >>>> person responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, please contact >>>> the sender at the email above and delete this email and any attachments and >>>> destroy any copies thereof. Any review, retransmission, dissemination, >>>> copying or other use of, or taking any action in reliance upon, this >>>> information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is >>>> strictly prohibited. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> From: Klausen Schaefersinho <[email protected]> >>>> Reply-To: <[email protected]> >>>> Date: Wednesday, February 19, 2014 at 5:58 AM >>>> To: <[email protected]> >>>> Subject: JDBC Connections >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> one of my bolt will need to write to a MySql data base. Does anybody >>>> has some experience with this? What are the best practices? Use an >>>> connection pool? Or keep one connection open per bolt? >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> >>>> klaus >>>> >>> >>> >> >
