I have no idea what happens if you bring down all of the nodes in the cluster while the topologies are deactivated. I'd suggest testing it and seeing, or maybe someone else can speak up?
Also depending on the version of storm you're upgrading from, there may be different steps involved that may complicate things. See release notes around upgrading from 0.8.x to 0.9.0: https://storm.apache.org/2013/12/08/storm090-released.html#api-compatibility-and-upgrading for just an example. Additionally depending on if the storm client API changes significantly between versions, it may require recompiling existing topology code against the new API version before it can run properly on the new storm cluster version. Taking a wild guess... this probably really only will be a problem when upgrading major versions, and less of a concern for minor version upgrades, but again I don't really know that for sure. On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Garcia-Contractor, Joseph (CORP) < joseph.garcia-contrac...@adp.com> wrote: > Stephen, > > > > Thank you for the response! Helps out a lot. > > > > So a further question. And forgive my lack of knowledge here, I am not > the one using Storm, only deploying and running it, so I don’t understand > all the reasoning behind why something is done a certain way in Storm. > > > > Let’s say I have deactivated all the topologies. Is it necessary to then > kill the topology? Could I not just wait a set amount of time to ensure > the tuples have cleared, say 5 minutes, and then bring down the nodes? > > > > The reason I ask this is because it is a lot easier to activate the > topologies after the nodes are back up with a non-interactive script. I > would like to avoid using “storm jar” to load the topology because that > means I need to hard code stuff into my scripts or come up with a separate > conf file for my script. See my current code below: > > > > function deactivate_topos { > > STORM_TOPO_STATUS=$(storm list | sed -n -e > '/^-------------------------------------------------------------------/,$p' > | sed -e > '/^-------------------------------------------------------------------/d' | > awk '{print $1 ":" $2}') > > > > for i in $STORM_TOPO_STATUS > > do > > IFS=':' read TOPO_NAME TOPO_STATUS <<< "$i" > > echo "$TOPO_NAME $TOPO_STATUS" > > if [ $TOPO_STATUS = 'ACTIVE' ]; then > > storm deactivate ${TOPO_NAME} > > fi > > storm list | sed -n -e > '/^-------------------------------------------------------------------/,$p' > > done > > } > > > > function activate_topos { > > STORM_TOPO_STATUS=$(storm list | sed -n -e > '/^-------------------------------------------------------------------/,$p' > | sed -e > '/^-------------------------------------------------------------------/d' | > awk '{print $1 ":" $2}') > > for i in $STORM_TOPO_STATUS > > do > > IFS=':' read TOPO_NAME TOPO_STATUS <<< "$i" > > echo "$TOPO_NAME $TOPO_STATUS" > > if [ $TOPO_STATUS = 'INACTIVE' ]; then > > storm activate ${TOPO_NAME} > > fi > > storm list | sed -n -e > '/^-------------------------------------------------------------------/,$p' > > done > > } > > > > *From:* Stephen Powis [mailto:spo...@salesforce.com] > *Sent:* Tuesday, September 29, 2015 12:45 PM > > *To:* user@storm.apache.org > *Subject:* Re: Starting and stopping storm > > > > I would imagine the safest way would be to elect to deactivate each > running topology, which should make your spouts stop emitting tuples. > You'd wait for all of the currently processing tuples to finish processing, > and then kill the topology. > > If tuples get processed quickly in your topologies, you can effectively do > this by selecting kill and giving it a long enough wait time. IE -- > Telling storm to kill your topology after 30 seconds means it will > deactivate your spouts for 30 seconds, waiting for existing tuples to > finish getting processed, and then kill off the topology. > > Then bring down each node, upgrade it, bring it back online and resubmit > your topologies. > > > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 10:02 AM, Garcia-Contractor, Joseph (CORP) < > joseph.garcia-contrac...@adp.com> wrote: > > I don't think I got my question across right or I am confused. > > Let me break this down in a more simple fashion. > > I have a Storm Cluster named "The Quiet Storm" ;) here is what it consists > of: > > ****** > Server ZK1: Running Zookeeper > Server ZK2: Running Zookeeper > Server ZK3: Running Zookeeper > > Server N1: SupervisorD running Storm Nimbus > > Server S1: SupervisorD running Storm Supervisor with 4 workers. > Server S2: SupervisorD running Storm Supervisor with 4 workers. > Server S3: SupervisorD running Storm Supervisor with 4 workers. > ****** > > Now the "The Quiet Storm" can have 1-n number of topologies running on it. > > I need to shut down all the servers in the cluster for maintenance. What > is the procedure to do this without doing harm to the currently running > topologies? > > Thank you, > > Joe > > -----Original Message----- > From: Matthias J. Sax [mailto:mj...@apache.org] > Sent: Monday, September 28, 2015 12:15 PM > To: user@storm.apache.org > Subject: Re: Starting and stopping storm > > Hi, > > as always: it depends. ;) > > Storm itself clear ups its own resources just fine. However, if the > running topology needs to clean-up/release resources before it is shut > down, Storm is not of any help. Even if there is a Spout/Bolt cleanup() > method, Storm does not guarantee that it will be called. > > Thus, using "storm deactivate" is a good way to achieve proper cleanup. > However, the topology must provide some code for it, too. On the call to > Spout.deactivate(), it must emit a special "clean-up" message (that you > have to design by yourself) that must propagate through the whole topology, > ie, each bolt must forward this message to all its output streams. > Furthermore, bolts must to the clean-up if they receive this message. > > Long story short: "storm deactivate" before "storm kill" makes only sense > if the topology requires proper cleanup and if the topology itself can > react/cleanup properly on Spout.deactivate(). > > Using "storm activate" in not necessary in any case. > > -Matthias > > > On 09/28/2015 05:08 PM, Garcia-Contractor, Joseph (CORP) wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > I am a DevOps guy and I need implement a storm cluster > > with the proper start and stop init scripts on a Linux server. I > > already went through the documentation and it seems simple enough. I > > am using supervisor as my process manager. I am however having a > > debate with one of the developers using Storm on the proper way to > > shutdown Storm and I am hoping that you fine folks can help us out in > this regard. > > > > > > > > The developer believes that before you tell supervisor > > to kill (SIGTERM) the storm workers, supervisor, and nimbus, you must > > first issue a "storm deactivate topology-name", then tell supervisor > > to kill all the various processes. He believes this because he > > doesn't know if Storm will do an orderly shutdown on SIGTERM and that > > there is a chance that something will get screwed up. This also means > > that when you start storm, after nimbus is up, you need to issue a > > ""storm activate topology-name". > > > > > > > > I am of the belief that because of storms fast fail and > > because it guarantees data processing, none of that is necessary and > > that you can just tell supervisor to stop the process. > > > > > > > > So who is right here? > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of > > the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and > > confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended > > recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, > > you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication > > is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in > > error, notify the sender immediately by return email and delete the > > message and any attachments from your system. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the > addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. > If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized > representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any > dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have > received this communication in error, notify the sender immediately by > return email and delete the message and any attachments from your system. > > >
