Sharding is a pain in the ass and should be avoided when possible.

If its possible, I'd look for another data store that can handle a higher
load as a cluster so you don't have to worry about the details of sharding.




On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 8:54 AM, masoom alam <[email protected]> wrote:

> @Sean: You are right, MYSQL is not configured to handle 1000 events per
> second. I will post the results of Batch, which is also slow in our case.I
> think we should investigate thoroughly why Batch of for example 1000 is
> also slow in our case.
>
> BTW, How easy it is to configure/implement Shards in MYSQL. Any useful
> pointers?
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 6:48 PM, Sean Allen 
> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> Is your mysql set up to handle 1000 writes a second?
>>
>> I'm going to guess no. If that is the case then Klaus' suggestions are
>> good ones. Batch or Shard.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 8:45 AM, masoom alam <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>> 1000 Events per second.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 6:40 PM, Sean Allen <[email protected]
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> How much traffic exactly are you pushing at mysql before the load gets
>>>> to high and it starts to buckle under the weight?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 8:38 AM, masoom alam <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dear All,
>>>>>
>>>>> Have any body worked on the configurations/optimizations needed
>>>>> generally for using STORM with MYSQL. Our scenario stores data in MYSQL
>>>>> tables, but as the data rate increases MYSQL starts responding very slow
>>>>> (in some cases connection refused error), resulting in DBWriterBolt to
>>>>> slowdown. All the Topology is bottleneck by this issue. We cannot increase
>>>>> the traffic at source beyond a certain level, the reason we noted is that
>>>>> sink (MYSQL) or the bolt adjacent to sink is performing slow.
>>>>>
>>>>> Any suggestion on how should we proceed will be highly appreciated.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Ce n'est pas une signature
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Ce n'est pas une signature
>>
>
>


-- 

Ce n'est pas une signature

Reply via email to