Its an interesting read. The blog is vague on some details - with ACK on, the throughput was 80K/s. With their custom solution its 100K/s. Assuming they were both deployed on similar hardware (I do not know , the blog does not confirm either way), the difference is not something that warrants a custom framework to me. Obviously its working better for Loggly.
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 8:26 AM, Otis Gospodnetic <[email protected] > wrote: > Hi, > > Apparently Loggly decided to ditch Storm when they got hit by the 2.5x > performance degradation factor after turning on ACKing: > https://www.loggly.com/what-we-learned-about-scaling-with-apache-storm/ > > How does one minimize this performance hit? > Or maybe newer versions of Storm perform better with ACK? (Loggly tested > 0.82, they say) > > Thanks, > Otis > -- > Performance Monitoring * Log Analytics * Search Analytics > Solr & Elasticsearch Support * http://sematext.com/ > >
