Re: [Discuss][PIP-164] Support split bundle by flow or qps

2022-08-23 Thread PengHui Li
Thanks for the explanation LGTM Thanks, Penghui On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 11:41 PM Dave Fisher wrote: > While not a comment about this proposal I have a comment another split > bundle concept. > > Manually split out a topic into its own bundle. > > Say a bundle is 0x to 0x0200 with 5

Re: [Discuss][PIP-164] Support split bundle by flow or qps

2022-08-23 Thread Dave Fisher
While not a comment about this proposal I have a comment another split bundle concept. Manually split out a topic into its own bundle. Say a bundle is 0x to 0x0200 with 5 topics. t1 at 0x0010 t2 at 0x0030 t3 at 0x0110 t4 at 0x0123 t5 at 0x01AE Let’s split out

Re: [Discuss][PIP-164] Support split bundle by flow or qps

2022-08-23 Thread PengHui Li
It's a good idea to improve the bundle split for the case that the traffic of the topic doesn't change drastically Otherwise, we should not use this policy. or can we use it for all cases? I think It should be documented in the proposal. I have some questions - do we need to consider the

Re:[Discuss][PIP-164] Support split bundle by flow or qps

2022-07-26 Thread lordcheng10
When the broker is just started, the traffic or QPS may not be stable at this time. At this time, we can solve the problem by adjusting the time interval of the first load reporting task. At present, the time interval for executing the report task is 5 seconds, and it is not configurable. I can

Re: [Discuss][PIP-164] Support split bundle by flow or qps

2022-07-25 Thread Haiting Jiang
Hi, This is an interesting proposal and sure it can solve quite some load balance case. My concern on this is that, relative speaking, the QPS and flow data is temporary, it may changes a lot, so it's easy to create some bad cases, especially on startup. Any idea on this matter? Thanks,