Github user HeartSaVioR commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2241#discussion_r129501786
--- Diff: conf/defaults.yaml ---
@@ -253,11 +247,16 @@ topology.trident.batch.emit.interval.millis: 500
topology.testing.always.try.serialize: false
topology.classpath: null
topology.environment: null
-topology.bolts.outgoing.overflow.buffer.enable: false
-topology.disruptor.wait.timeout.millis: 1000
-topology.disruptor.batch.size: 100
-topology.disruptor.batch.timeout.millis: 1
-topology.disable.loadaware.messaging: false
+topology.bolts.outgoing.overflow.buffer.enable: false # TODO: Roshan :
Whats this ?
+topology.disruptor.wait.timeout.millis: 1000 # TODO: Roshan: not used,
but we may/not want this behavior
+topology.transfer.buffer.size: 50000
+topology.transfer.batch.size: 10
+topology.executor.receive.buffer.size: 50000
+topology.producer.batch.size: 1000 # TODO: Roshan: rename
+topology.flush.tuple.freq.millis: 5000
+topology.spout.recvq.skips: 3 # Check recvQ once every N invocations of
Spout's nextTuple() [when ACKs disabled]
--- End diff --
Just 2 cents: I guess we may want to split handler for receive and send
(two threads on spout like JStorm) eventually. Handling two different things in
a thread makes bottleneck, and after splitting nextTuple() can be blocked for a
longer or even infinitely if it is better for the spout.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at [email protected] or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
