Github user revans2 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/728#issuecomment-188822872
Yes I am aware of it. We are in the process of merging with the JStorm
project, and part of this merger involves moving most of the clojure code to
java. In all
Github user hsun-cnnxty commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/728#issuecomment-188640434
@revans2
Just merged code from master and seems there is performance degradation
with recent changes. I noticed that it not only affects this branch, but
Github user hsun-cnnxty commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/728#issuecomment-173483216
With some refactoring, now it can sustain throughput of 20,000 /sec which
it was not able to before. But latency at 20,000 /sec is still much higher
than 3.x (5+
Github user darionyaphet commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/728#issuecomment-170354259
mark
---
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
Github user revans2 commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/728#discussion_r49227209
--- Diff:
storm-core/src/jvm/backtype/storm/messaging/netty/KerberosSaslClientHandler.java
---
@@ -46,56 +44,48 @@ public
Github user revans2 commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/728#discussion_r49227072
--- Diff:
storm-core/src/jvm/backtype/storm/messaging/netty/ISaslClient.java ---
@@ -17,11 +17,9 @@
*/
package backtype.storm.messaging.netty;
Github user revans2 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/728#issuecomment-170100773
Everything looks really good now. just a few minor nits. I still have not
found time to run some performance tests, but I will try to do that today.
---
If your
Github user revans2 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/728#issuecomment-170145276
I just ran some performance tests using
https://github.com/apache/storm/blob/master/examples/storm-starter/src/jvm/storm/starter/ThroughputVsLatency.java
I ran
Github user hsun-cnnxty commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/728#issuecomment-170147036
Cool, at least we get some numbers to compare. I will see if there is
default setting need to be changed for netty 4.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can
Github user harshach commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/728#discussion_r49248827
--- Diff: storm-core/src/jvm/backtype/storm/messaging/netty/Client.java ---
@@ -17,41 +17,31 @@
*/
package backtype.storm.messaging.netty;
Github user revans2 commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/728#discussion_r49227426
--- Diff:
storm-core/src/jvm/backtype/storm/messaging/netty/NettyUncaughtExceptionHandler.java
---
@@ -21,6 +21,24 @@
import org.slf4j.Logger;
Github user revans2 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/728#issuecomment-170149708
@hsun-cnnxty I hope it is something like that. You should be able to run
the tests yourself too. They are not that complex. I build
```
mvn clean install
Github user rfarivar commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/728#discussion_r47586860
--- Diff: storm-core/src/jvm/backtype/storm/messaging/netty/Client.java ---
@@ -182,7 +177,7 @@ private boolean connectionEstablished(Channel channel) {
Github user rfarivar commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/728#discussion_r47586629
--- Diff: storm-core/src/jvm/backtype/storm/messaging/netty/Client.java ---
@@ -23,24 +23,17 @@
import backtype.storm.metric.api.IStatefulObject;
Github user rfarivar commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/728#discussion_r47586615
--- Diff: storm-core/src/jvm/backtype/storm/messaging/netty/Client.java ---
@@ -23,24 +23,17 @@
import backtype.storm.metric.api.IStatefulObject;
Github user hsun-cnnxty commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/728#discussion_r47597958
--- Diff: storm-core/src/jvm/backtype/storm/messaging/netty/Client.java ---
@@ -182,7 +177,7 @@ private boolean connectionEstablished(Channel channel) {
Github user revans2 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/728#issuecomment-145253788
@hsun-cnnxty, The changes look good to me. Please upmerge to the latest
code. Then I would like to run some performance tests on it to see how it
compares to the
Github user hsun-cnnxty commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/728#issuecomment-145318156
@revans2, just merged with the latest master. I don't have a decent storm
cluster for performance test. With a small local cluster on single machine.
I had tried
Github user hsun-cnnxty commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/728#issuecomment-141744079
Upgraded to latest 4.0.31.Final and changed the buffer allocation to lett
netty choose the best default based on the platform.
---
If your project is set up for it,
GitHub user hsun-cnnxty opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/728
[STORM-1038] Upgraded netty to 4.x
Upgraded the netty transportation layer to 4.x to take advantage of its
memory management efficiency.
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by
Github user HeartSaVioR commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/728#issuecomment-139122346
@hsun-cnnxty
Great work. Since it can affect performance I recommend you to include
benchmark test result.
You can refer #521 (comment) to how to do it.
Github user hsun-cnnxty commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/storm/pull/728#issuecomment-139123790
Good suggestion. I will get to work on them as soon as I get some time. I
am also curious to verify the memory efficiency claimed by 4.x
---
If your project is set
22 matches
Mail list logo
