Thanks for the suggestions. However restricting to one worker per host
might be too restrictive in a shared multi tenant setup. Custom scheduler
too may not be feasible given the nature of the setup.


On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 6:17 AM, Srinath C <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 11:34 AM, Preetam Rao <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> Appreciate any pointers on the following which are causing us problems in
>> production.
>>
>> 1. Is there a way we can restrict multiple instances of a given spout be
>> allocated on "different hosts" ? Our spouts start a embedded Jetty server
>> that listen on a well known port (Here https). Thus parallelism on same
>> host does not help. Observing that most often, even when parallelism is set
>> to 5, all get allocated on same host rendering  the parallelism wasted and
>> which in turn is causing load issues. From discussion I have read, my
>> thinking is it is not possible. But it is a critical issue for us right
>> now, so pointers help.
>>
>
> You could probably do this by restricting one worker per host and setting
> parallelism and num tasks < num of workers.
>
>
>>
>> 2. Is there a way we can control how many components get allocated per
>> worker (Or, enforce rule that never allocate more than one component per
>> worker) ? Irrespective of high worker count setup, occasionally both spout
>> as well as bolt are getting allocated on same worker (that is same host &
>> storm port). This is causing load & GC issues since the input rate is quite
>> high. .
>>
>
> I recently came across an article. See if this helps
> http://xumingming.sinaapp.com/885/twitter-storm-how-to-develop-a-pluggable-scheduler/
>
>
>>
>> 3. Ours is a multi tenant setup. On the same lines as item 2 above, how
>> can we prevent components from different topologies not running on same
>> worker ? Because that simply means any topology by chance can break the
>> worker (say memory leak) on which my typology's components are running on.
>>
>
> Probably you can just restrict one worker process per host?
>
>
>>
>> Thanks in advance for any pointers/suggestions.
>> Preetam
>>
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to