[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SAMZA-47?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13905651#comment-13905651
 ] 

Martin Kleppmann commented on SAMZA-47:
---------------------------------------

Testing out the Github integration (SAMZA-149!) with this pull request: 
https://github.com/apache/incubator-samza/pull/1

A few questions:

* It seemed most natural to me to put SamzaContainerContext in the 
org.apache.samza.container package, even though that package didn't already 
exist in the samza-api module. Would you prefer it to be somewhere else?
* I also tidied up a few other properties and brought the documentation 
up-to-date
* Gave the write buffer size the same treatment as the cache size, since it's a 
similar off-heap, per-leveldb-instance allocation.
* The change currently doesn't worry about backwards compatibility; any jobs 
using the old config properties will have them silently ignored. If that's a 
problem, we could try to preserve them (at the cost of messier code).


> LevelDB and L1 cache use the same configuration value in KeyValueStorageEngine
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SAMZA-47
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SAMZA-47
>             Project: Samza
>          Issue Type: Bug
>    Affects Versions: 0.7.0
>            Reporter: Jay Kreps
>            Assignee: Martin Kleppmann
>
> Both seem to key off of
>   cache.size
> This is not right. The L1 cache is caching a number of objects and leveldb is 
> allocating a number of bytes. In general the leveldb cache should be big 
> (tens of MBs) and the L1 cache small (a few thousand).



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1.5#6160)

Reply via email to