[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SAMZA-334?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14062348#comment-14062348
 ] 

Sriram Subramanian commented on SAMZA-334:
------------------------------------------

I am not sure I entirely agree having per container level resource requirement 
settings. Let us think from the framework users perspective. It is really hard 
for a user to determine what the resource consumption would be per container 
based on the custom partitioning scheme, the topic/partition size, throughput, 
type of computation etc. There are so many variables involved that the user 
would probably give up and just use the job level configs making this feature 
useless. 

> Need for asymmetric container config
> ------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: SAMZA-334
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SAMZA-334
>             Project: Samza
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: container
>    Affects Versions: 0.8.0
>            Reporter: Chinmay Soman
>
> The current (and upcoming) partitioning scheme(s) suggest that there might be 
> a skew in the amount of data ingested and computation performed across 
> different containers for a given Samza job. This directly affects the amount 
> of resources required by a container - which today are completely symmetric.
> Case A] Partitioning on Kafka partitions
> For instance, consider a partitioner job which reads data from different 
> Kafka topics (having different partition layouts). In this case, its possible 
> that a lot of topics have a smaller number of Kafka partitions. Consequently 
> the containers processing these partitions would need more resources than 
> those responsible for the higher numbered partitions. 
> Case B] Partitioning based on Kafka topics
> Even in this case, its very easy for some containers to be doing more work 
> than others - leading to a skew in resource requirements.
> Today, the container config is based on the requirements for the worst (doing 
> the most work) container. Needless to say, this leads to resource wastage. A 
> better approach needs to consider what is the true requirement per container 
> (instead of per job).



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)

Reply via email to