nd to broker contains higher message
> count.
> Eric
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Craig Pastro
> Sent: Thursday, November 28, 2019 9:10 PM
> To: users@kafka.apache.org
> Subject: More partitions => less throughput?
>
> External
>
> Hello there,
>
&
, 2019 9:10 PM
To: users@kafka.apache.org
Subject: More partitions => less throughput?
External
Hello there,
I was wondering if anyone here could help me with some insight into a conundrum
that I am facing.
Basically, the story is that I am running three Kafka brokers via docker on a
single
Testing multiple brokers VMs on a single host won’t give you accurate
performance numbers unless that is how you will be deploying kafka in
production. (Don’t do this.) All your kafka networking is being handled by a
single host, so instead of being spread out between machines to increase total
I think the number of partitions needs to be tuned to the size of the
cluster; 64 partitions on what is essentially a single box seems high. Do
you know what hardware you will be deploying on in production? Can you run
your benchmark on that instead of a vm?
—Tom
On Thursday, November 28, 2019,
Hello there,
I was wondering if anyone here could help me with some insight into a
conundrum that I am facing.
Basically, the story is that I am running three Kafka brokers via docker on
a single vm with log.flush.interval.messages = 1 and min.insync.replicas =
2. Then I create two topics: both
