Github user roshannaik commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/2241#discussion_r129729086
--- 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 --
It is something we can consider in the future. But if we process ACKs in a
separate thread, then the Spout.ack() will run concurrently with
spout.nextTuple() that means all the existing spouts need to be updated to
synchronize appropriately internally to avoid race condition beween nextTuple
and ack(). Thats a big breaking change. Also brings in some other complexities
which we can discuss separately.
---
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.
---
